Louise Hu v Stansure Strata Pty Ltd

[2014] HCASL 201

LOUISE HU

v

STANSURE STRATA PTY LTD & ORS

[2014] HCASL 201
B36/2014

1. The applicant is the owner of an apartment in a strata title scheme.  She complained to the Australian Human Rights Commission that the first respondent had unlawfully discriminated against her on the ground of her race[1].  Subsequently, the applicant commenced proceedings in the Federal Circuit Court of Australia (Judge Burnett) arising out of the determination of that complaint.

   [1]Racial Discrimination Act 1975 (Cth), ss 9(1), 9(2), 10(1), 11, 12(1)(d) and 18C.

2. On 14 May 2014, Judge Burnett dismissed the application.  His Honour found the applicant to be an "inherently implausible and unreliable witness" who presented as "delusional and detached from reality"[2].  Judge Burnett was not satisfied that the incidents alleged by the applicant occurred or, if they did, that they had a racial dimension to them. 

   [2]Hu v Stansure Strata Pty Ltd [2014] FCCA 905 at [17].

3. On 18 July 2014, the Federal Court of Australia (Rangiah J) dismissed the applicant's appeal.

4. The applicant now seeks special leave to appeal. She does not have legal representation and her application falls to be determined under r 41.10 of the High Court Rules 2004 (Cth).

5. The application was not filed within time[3].  The relatively short delay is not explained in the applicant's affidavit.

   [3]High Court Rules 2004 (Cth), r 41.02.1.

6. The discursive proposed grounds of appeal and the written case do not disclose any basis for calling into question the correctness of Rangiah J's judgment. If special leave to appeal were granted, the appeal would have no prospect of success.  For this reason, there is no utility in an order enlarging the time in which to bring the application. 

7. The application is dismissed.

8. Pursuant to r 41.10.5, we direct the Registrar to draw up, sign and seal an order dismissing the application.

V.M. Bell
10 December 2014 S.J. Gageler