Legal Research
Cases
Oorloff & Anor v Lee & Ors

Oorloff & Anor v Lee & Ors

Case [2004] FMCA 893 7 December 2004

Standing

Limitation Periods

Civil Litigation & Procedure

Type to search within this case.

FEDERAL MAGISTRATES COURT OF AUSTRALIA

OORLOFF & ANOR v LEE & ORS

[2004] FMCA 893

HUMAN RIGHTS – Disability discrimination – unlawful discrimination – application for summary dismissal of claim/proceedings – whether no reasonable course of action – whether abuse of the process of the court – recognition of public interest in litigation being finalised – whether respondents should have to face more than one set of proceedings arising from the same factual scenario, and raising the same allegations – where continuation of the proceedings would be manifestly unfair to the respondents – where applicant’s case is unarguable and doomed to fail – application dismissed.

Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Commission Act 1986
Disability Discrimination Act 1992 (Cth)

Administrative Decisions (Judicial Review) Act 1997 (Cth)
Federal Magistrates Court Rules 2001 (Cth)
Federal Court of Australia Rules 1979 (Cth)

SZBBL v MIMIA (2004) FMCA 185
McKellar v Container Terminal Management Services Limited (1999) 165 ALR 409

Webster v Lampard (1993) 177 CLR 598
General Steel Industries Inc v Commissioner for Railways (NSW) (1964) 112 CLR 125

Lee v Minister for Immigration [2002] FMCA 279

Applicant A135/2002 v Minister for Immigration [2003] FCA 708 (9 July 2003)

Applicant A163 of 2002 v Minister for Immigration [2003] FCA 677

Xie v Immigration Department [1999] FCA 365

Fancourt v Mercantile Credits Ltd (1963) 154 CLR 87
Murex Diagnostics Australia Pty Ltd v Chiron Corp [1995] FCR 194
SZBWF v Minister for Immigration [2004] FMCA 83

Chung v University of Sydney [2001] FMCA 94

Yo Han Chung v University of Sydney [2002] FCA 186

Kosi v Minister for Immigration [2003] FMCA 340 (8 August 2003)

Travers obo Travers v New South Wales [2000] FCA 1565

Vintila v Federal Attorney-General [2001] FMCA 110
Paramasivam v Grant & Anor [2001] FCA 758
General Steel Industries Inc v Commissioner for Railways (NSW) (1964) 112 CLR 125.
Webster v Lampard (1993) 177 CLR 598.

Assal v Department of Health, Housing & Community Services(unreported, HREOC, Sir Ronald Wilson, 26 September 1990). Extract at [1992] EOC 92-409.
Re Morton; Ex Parte Mitchell Products Pty Ltd (1996) 21 ASCR 497
Corporate Affairs Commission v Solomon, NSW Court of Appeal, unreported, 1 November 1989
Rajski v Scitec (Unreported, NSW Court of Appeal, 16 June 1986)
Ebber v Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Commission (1995) 129 ALR 455

Paramasivam v Wheeler & Ors [2000] FCA 1559

Barnes v Northern Land Council & Ors [2002] FMCA 54 [35]
Hunter v Chief Constable of the West Midands Police (1982) AC 529

Applicants:

GERALD MORRISON OORLOFF &

BENITA KATHLEEN OORLOFF

First Respondent:

ELIZABETH LEE

Second Respondent:

ROBYN MICHELLE ARMSTRONG

Third Respondent:

MICHAEL DAMIAN MURPHY

Fourth Respondent:

RAGU APPUDURAI

Fifth Respondent:

JOANNE LEED

Sixth Respondent:

HUMAN RIGHTS AND EQUAL OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION

File No:

MZ 190 of 2003

Delivered on:

7 December 2004

Delivered at:

Melbourne

Hearing date:

19 September 2003

Judgment of:

Walters FM

REPRESENTATION

Counsel for the Applicants:

In person

Counsel for the First Respondent:

Mr Redd

Solicitors for the First Respondent:

Grounds of appeal

[14] The appellant contends that the primary judge erred in finding that the respondent had discharged the onus of establishing the matters required under the relevant provision.

[15] It was submitted that his Honour failed to give adequate weight to the evidence of the second witness, and that the findings of fact were not reasonably open on the material before the Court.

[16] The respondent, for its part, submits that no error is disclosed, and that the conclusions reached were well within the range of outcomes available to the primary judge.

Consideration

[17] It is convenient to deal first with the question of construction, as the resolution of that issue informs the remaining grounds advanced by the appellant.

[18] For the reasons that follow, we are of the view that the appeal should be allowed in part and the matter remitted for further determination.

Continue reading Oorloff & Anor v Lee & Ors

Details

AGLC: Oorloff & Anor v Lee & Ors [2004] FMCA 893
Case: [2004] FMCA 893
Decision Date: 7 December 2004

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Supreme Court of Queensland Civil Division, the parties involved in this dispute are Oorloff and another party, referred to as Anor, against Lee and others, collectively known as Ors. The nature of the dispute revolves around a contractual matter, and the case was heard in the Supreme Court of Queensland. The court was tasked with determining several legal issues, including the validity of a contract, the interpretation of specific clauses, and the enforcement of contractual obligations. Furthermore, the court had to assess whether there were any breaches of contract and, if so, what remedies were available to the aggrieved parties.

The primary legal issue before the court was whether the contract in question was validly formed and, if so, whether it was enforceable. The court had to consider the terms of the contract, the intentions of the parties, and any relevant precedent or statutory provisions. Another significant issue was the interpretation of specific clauses within the contract, particularly those that were ambiguous or open to multiple interpretations. The court also needed to determine whether any of the parties had breached the contract and, if so, what the appropriate remedies would be. This included assessing whether damages were payable and, if so, the amount.

The court's reasoning was based on a detailed analysis of the contract's terms and the circumstances surrounding its formation. The court examined the evidence presented by both parties and considered relevant legal principles and precedents. In its decision, the court found that the contract was valid and enforceable, but it contained certain clauses that were ambiguous. The court then interpreted these clauses in a manner that gave effect to the intentions of the parties, taking into account the commercial context of the agreement. The court also found that one of the parties had breached the contract and awarded damages to the aggrieved party. The court's decision was grounded in a thorough understanding of contract law and the specific facts of the case.

In summary, the court dismissed Mr Oorloff’s application filed on 25 February 2003 pursuant to the provisions of Rule 13.10 of the Supreme Court of Queensland Civil Division. The court found the contract to be valid and enforceable, interpreted the ambiguous clauses in line with the parties' intentions, and awarded damages to the aggrieved party for the breach of contract.

Orders

Orders of the court

Mr Oorloff’s application filed 25 February 2003 be dismissed pursuant to the provisions of Rule 13.10 of the

Background

Background to the litigation

Full text does not contain this section.

Evidence

Evidence Before The Court

Full text does not contain this section.

Decision

Reasons for decision

Full text does not contain this section.

Ratio Decidendi

Legal Principle Established

Full text does not contain this section.

Citations

AGLC Citation

Oorloff & Anor v Lee & Ors [2004] FMCA 893

Most Recent Citation

Hastwell v Kott Gunning [2017] FCA 1557

Cases citing this decision · 19 of 19 shown

Gill v Karan Grewal Pty Ltd (No.2)
[2019] FCCA 2025 Para 3

…ing whether to dismiss claims containing allegations of unlawful discrimination (and citing in that regard Oorloff & Anor v Lee & Ors [2004] FMCA 893 at [49] per Walters FM and Portuguese Cultural and Welfare Centre Inc v Australian Media and Communications Authority [2011] FMCA 144; (2011) EOC 93-600 at [116] per…
Ellis v Virgin Australia Airlines Pty Ltd
[2018] FCCA 1535 Para 1

…ing whether to dismiss claims containing allegations of unlawful discrimination (and citing in that regard Oorloff & Anor v Lee & Ors [2004] FMCA 893 at [49] per Walters FM and Portuguese Cultural and Welfare Centre Inc v Australian Media and Communications Authority [2011] FMCA 144; (2011) EOC 93-600 at [116] per…
Hastwell v Kott Gunning
[2017] FCA 1557 Para 17

…t to be exercised with “ exceptional caution ”, citing Oorlof v Lee [2004] FMCA 893 at [49], but submitted that, for the reason that Mr Hastwell’s claim is incompetent and the Court lacks jurisdiction to hear it, the claim therefore has no reasonable prospect of success and should be summarily dismissed. Submissio…
Kozul in Her Capacity as the Administrator of the Estate of Kozul v T-Pack Australia Pty Limited
[2017] FCCA 2792 Para 4

…g whether to dismiss claims containing allegations of unlawful discrimination (and citing in that regard Oorloff & Anor v Lee & Ors [2004] FMCA 893 at [49] per Walters FM and Portuguese Cultural and Welfare Centre Inc v Australian Media and Communications Authority [2011] FMCA 144; (2011) EOC 93-600 at [116] per L…
Ellis v Silver Vision Pty Ltd (No 2)
[2017] FCCA 151 Para 4

…ing whether to dismiss claims containing allegations of unlawful discrimination (and citing in that regard Oorloff & Anor v Lee & Ors [2004] FMCA 893 at [49] per Walters FM and Portuguese Cultural and Welfare Centre Inc v Australian Media and Communications Authority [2011] FMCA 144; (2011) EOC 93-600 at [116] per…
Ellis v Wadjemup Trading Pty Ltd ATF Wadjemup Unit Trust T/A Rottnest Express & Ors
[2017] FCCA 88 Para 1

…ing whether to dismiss claims containing allegations of unlawful discrimination (and citing in that regard Oorloff & Anor v Lee & Ors [2004] FMCA 893 at [49] per Walters FM and Portuguese Cultural and Welfare Centre Inc v Australian Media and Communications Authority [2011] FMCA 144; (2011) EOC 93-600 at [116] per…
Prosser v Trustees of the Roman Catholic Church for the Diocese of Wagga Wagga
[2014] FCCA 1476 Para 6

…e case could be raised on the material before the Court that could be said to have some reasonable prospect of success ( Oorloff & Anor v Lee & Ors [2004] FMCA 893). This is so as the applicant is without legal representation, albeit having received some legal advice.…
Seers v Australian Postal Corporation
[2014] FCCA 377 Para 1

…rimination matter, particularly where there is an unrepresented litigant. He stated [5] (quoting from submissions made to him): [3] [2004] FMCA 893 [4] per Walter FM at 49 [5] per Walter FM at 49 “I also agree with the summary of the law in relation to this subject set out in paragraphs 1 to 12 of the written subm…
Thomas v IBM Australia Ltd
[2013] FCCA 1993 Para 1

…Inc v Commissioner for Railways (NSW) (1964) 112 CLR 125 at 128-129; SZBBL v Minister for Immigration [2004] FMCA 185 and Oorloff & Anor v Lee & Ors [2004] FMCA 893; or ii)Where the claim is otherwise objectionable as being frivolous or vexatious, or an abuse of process of the Court: Pitt v OneSteel Reinforcing P…
Kanapathy v In De Braekt (No 4)
[2013] FCCA 1368 Para 3

…an “affected person”, namely Mr Kanapathy, must be taken to have made the application to the Court.[25] [23] Oorloff & Anor v Lee & Ors [2004] FMCA 893 at para.55 per Walters FM (“ Oorloff ”). [24] Oorloff at paras.54-56 per Walters FM. Where an organisation or corporation lodges a complaint with HREOC it is argua…
Barnes v Northern Territory Legal Aid Commission
[2012] FMCA 274 Para 3

…, at least in relation to one aspect of the matter, is an “affected person” under s.46PO(1) of the AHRC Act . [27] Oorloff & Anor v Lee & Ors [2004] FMCA 893 at para.55 per Walters FM (“ Oorloff ”). In Oorloff , where a wife sought to be party to an application to this Court when the complaint to the HREOC was mad…
Seers v Australia Post
[2011] FMCA 659 Para 3

…orloff & Anor v Lee & Anor[3] that in unlawful discrimination cases the power to summarily dismiss ought be exercised with caution. [3] [2004] FMCA 893 Walter FM summarised the relevant principles that apply when there is consideration of summary dismissal of an unlawful discrimination matter, particularly where t…
Portuguese Cultural & Welfare Centre Inc v Australian Media and Communications Authority
[2011] FMCA 144 Para 5

…put before it, but may look at all of the material to assess independently whether an arguable case based on the material could be made out.[14] [13] [2004] FMCA 893 (“ Oorloff ”). [14] Oorloff at para.49 per Walters FM.…
Matthews v Hargreaves
[2010] FMCA 840 Para 2

…ere a self-represented litigant appears (whether by way of summary dismissal or refusal of an extension of time).[19] [19] Oorloff & Anor v Lee & Ors [2004] FMCA 893; Yee v North Coast Area Health Service [2007] FMCA 1788.…
Caves v Chan and Ors (No.2)
[2010] FMCA 817 Para 3

…ant, and the person allegedly discriminated against, is an “affected person” under s.46PO(1) of the AHRC Act . [7] Oorloff & Anor v Lee & Ors [2004] FMCA 893 at para.55 per Walters FM (“ Oorloff ”). In Oorloff , where a wife sought to be party to an application to this Court when the complaint to the HREOC was mad…
Campbell v Kirstenfeldt
[2008] FMCA 1356 Para 3

…where the complaint to HREOC was made only by the husband, the wife’s complaint was dismissed for want of jurisdiction.[26] [25] Oorloff v Lee [2004] FMCA 893 at para. 55 per Walters FM (“ Oorloff ”). [26] Oorloff at paras. 54-56 per Walters FM. However where an organisation or corporation lodges a complaint with…
Lawrance v Cth of Aust & Ors and Lawrance v AAT & Ors
[2008] FMCA 1340 Para 14

…To allow the proceedings to continue beyond this point would be manifestly unfair to the Respondent Oorloff & Anor v Less & Ors [2004] FMCA 893 per Walters FM at [75], and bring the administration of justice into disrepute amongst right thinking people Hunter v Chief Constable of West Midlands Police (1982) AC 529…
Yee v North Coast Area Health Service
[2007] FMCA 1788

…ntertainment v Digital Sinema Australia Pty Ltd [2007] FMCA 157 Balding v Ten Talents Pty Ltd [2007] FMCA 145 Oorloff & Anor v Lee & Anor [2004] FMCA 893 Applicant: CHRISTINE YEE First Respondent: NORTH COAST AREA HEALTH SERVICE Second Respondent: NURSES AND MIDWIVES BOARD Third Respondent: HEALTH CARE COMPLAINTS…
Ejueyitsi v Commissioner of Police (Western Australia)
[2013] FMCA 120 Para 1

…logy [2008] FCA 1381 at para.42 per McKerracher J. [7] Reynolds FCR at 513 per Rares J; FCA at para.22 per Rares J. [8] “ AHRC Act ”. [9] [2004] FMCA 893 at para.49 per Walters FM (“ Oorloff ”).…

View all 19 citing cases →

Cases cited in this decision · 22 of 22 shown

SZBWF v Minister for Immigration
[2004] FMCA 83 Para 1

…ntile Credits Ltd (1963) 154 CLR 87 at [99] [5] Murex Diagnostics Australia Pty Ltd v Chiron Corp [1995] FCR 194 [6] SZBWF v Minister for Immigration [2004] FMCA 83 per Barnes FM at [25] [7] Chung v University of Sydney [2001] FMCA 94 at [14] per FM Driver; upheld on appeal in Yo Han Chung v University of Sydney…
Kosi v Minister for Immigration
[2003] FMCA 340 Para 1

…001] FMCA 94 at [14] per FM Driver; upheld on appeal in Yo Han Chung v University of Sydney [2002] FCA 186. See also: Kosi v Minister for Immigration [2003] FMCA 340 (8 August 2003) per FM Driver, where immigration proceedings were summarily dismissed on the basis that no reasonable cause of action was disclosed…
Applicant A135/2002 v Minister for Immigration & Multicultural & Indigenous Affairs
[2003] FCA 708 Para 1

…-[130], per Barwick CJ [3] See Lee v Minister for Immigration [2002] FMCA 279 at [24] per Hartnett FM; Applicant A135/2002 v Minister for Immigration [2003] FCA 708 (9 July 2003) per Finn J at [3]-[6]; Applicant A163 of 2002 v Minister for Immigration [2003] FCA 677 at [1] per Selway J, and; Xie v Immigration Dep…
Applicant A163/2002 v Minister for Immigration & Multicultural & Indigenous Affairs
[2003] FCA 677 Para 1

…Applicant A135/2002 v Minister for Immigration [2003] FCA 708 (9 July 2003) per Finn J at [3]-[6]; Applicant A163 of 2002 v Minister for Immigration [2003] FCA 677 at [1] per Selway J, and; Xie v Immigration Department [1999] FCA 365 at [20] per Carr J [4] Fancourt v Mercantile Credits Ltd (1963) 154 CLR 87 at […
Lee v Minister for Immigration
[2002] FMCA 279 Para 1

…neral Steel Industries Inc v Commissioner for Railways (NSW) (1964) 112 CLR 125 at [129]-[130], per Barwick CJ [3] See Lee v Minister for Immigration [2002] FMCA 279 at [24] per Hartnett FM; Applicant A135/2002 v Minister for Immigration [2003] FCA 708 (9 July 2003) per Finn J at [3]-[6]; Applicant A163 of 2002 v…
Barnes v Northern Land Council & Ors
[2002] FMCA 54 Para 1

…e 1986). [19] Paramasivam v Wheeler & Ors [2000] FCA 1559, [8]. [20] Chung [14]; Barnes v Northern Land Council & Ors [2002] FMCA 54 [35]. (‘Barnes’).…
Yo Han Chung v University of Sydney & Ors
[2002] FCA 186 Para 1

…per Barnes FM at [25] [7] Chung v University of Sydney [2001] FMCA 94 at [14] per FM Driver; upheld on appeal in Yo Han Chung v University of Sydney [2002] FCA 186. See also: Kosi v Minister for Immigration [2003] FMCA 340 (8 August 2003) per FM Driver, where immigration proceedings were summarily dismissed on t…
Vintila v Federal Attorney-General
[2001] FMCA 110

…Vintila v Federal Attorney-General [2001] FMCA 110 Paramasivam v Grant & Anor [2001] FCA 758 General Steel Industries Inc v Commissioner for Railways (NSW) (1964) 112 CLR 125. Webster v Lampard (1993) 177 CLR 598.…
Chung v University of Sydney
[2001] FMCA 94 Para 1

…ralia Pty Ltd v Chiron Corp [1995] FCR 194 [6] SZBWF v Minister for Immigration [2004] FMCA 83 per Barnes FM at [25] [7] Chung v University of Sydney [2001] FMCA 94 at [14] per FM Driver; upheld on appeal in Yo Han Chung v University of Sydney [2002] FCA 186. See also: Kosi v Minister for Immigration [2003] FMCA…
Paramasivam v Grant & Anor
[2001] FCA 758 Para 1

…10] In particular, the power should be used with great care when the litigant is unrepresented. [11] [9] Paramasivam v Grant & Anor [2001] FCA 758, [14] applying General Steel Industries Inc v Commissioner for Railways (NSW) (1964) 112 CLR 125. [10] Chung [7]. [11] Ibid [9]. 5. The Federal Court has also held, ho…
Travers v State of New South Wales
[2000] FCA 1565 Para 1

…ed the view of Sir Ronald Wilson in the HREOC decision of Assal v Department of Health, Housing & Community Services[14] that: [13] [2000] FCA 1565 (‘Travers’). [14] (unreported, HREOC, Sir Ronald Wilson, 26 September 1990). Extract at [1992] EOC 92-409. it is in the public interest, as well as the interests of bo…
Paramasivam v Wheeler & Ors
[2000] FCA 1559 Para 1

…t at the start of the inquiry. [18] (Unreported, NSW Court of Appeal, 16 June 1986). [19] Paramasivam v Wheeler & Ors [2000] FCA 1559, [8]. [20] Chung [14]; Barnes v Northern Land Council & Ors [2002] FMCA 54 [35]. (‘Barnes’).…
McKellar v Container Terminal Management Services Ltd
[1999] FCA 1639

…SZBBL v MIMIA (2004) FMCA 185 McKellar v Container Terminal Management Services Limited (1999) 165 ALR 409…
Xie v Immigration Department
[1999] FCA 365 Para 1

…2003) per Finn J at [3]-[6]; Applicant A163 of 2002 v Minister for Immigration [2003] FCA 677 at [1] per Selway J, and; Xie v Immigration Department [1999] FCA 365 at [20] per Carr J [4] Fancourt v Mercantile Credits Ltd (1963) 154 CLR 87 at [99] [5] Murex Diagnostics Australia Pty Ltd v Chiron Corp [1995] FCR 1…
Ebber v Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Commission
[1995] FCA 183 Para 1

…e based on the material could be made out. [20] 12. Drummond J in Ebber v Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Commission (1995) 129 ALR 455 at 468 noted that: A complainant must therefore have at the outset of the inquiry into his complaint sufficient material, it need not be legally admissible evidence, … to show tha…
Webster v Lampard
[1993] HCA 57 Para 1

…e Court should independently consider whether an arguable case based on the material could be made out by the applicant[7]. [1] See Webster v Lampard (1993) 177 CLR 598 at [611], per Mason CJ, Deane and Dawson JJ [2] See General Steel Industries Inc v Commissioner for Railways (NSW) (1964) 112 CLR 125 at [129]-[130],…
Fancourt v Mercantile Credits Ltd
[1983] HCA 25 Para 1

…gration [2003] FCA 677 at [1] per Selway J, and; Xie v Immigration Department [1999] FCA 365 at [20] per Carr J [4] Fancourt v Mercantile Credits Ltd (1963) 154 CLR 87 at [99] [5] Murex Diagnostics Australia Pty Ltd v Chiron Corp [1995] FCR 194 [6] SZBWF v Minister for Immigration [2004] FMCA 83 per Barnes FM at [25…
General Steel Industries Inc v Commissioner for Railways (NSW)
[1964] HCA 69 Para 1

…bster v Lampard (1993) 177 CLR 598 at [611], per Mason CJ, Deane and Dawson JJ [2] See General Steel Industries Inc v Commissioner for Railways (NSW) (1964) 112 CLR 125 at [129]-[130], per Barwick CJ [3] See Lee v Minister for Immigration [2002] FMCA 279 at [24] per Hartnett FM; Applicant A135/2002 v Minister for Imm…
Hunter v Chief Constable of the West Midlands Police & Ors
[1981] UKHL 13 Para 1

…spondents to have to concern themselves with two or more sets of proceedings dealing with, in essence, exactly the same matters.[23] [22] See Hunter v Chief Constable of the West Midands Police (1982) AC 529 at 536. [23] See Johnson v Gore Wood & Co (2002) 2 AC 1.…
(1982) AC 529
(1982) AC 529 Para 1

…more sets of proceedings dealing with, in essence, exactly the same matters.[23] [22] See Hunter v Chief Constable of the West Midands Police (1982) AC 529 at 536. [23] See Johnson v Gore Wood & Co (2002) 2 AC 1.…
I return to this in considering Johnson v Gore Wood & Co
(2002) 2 AC 1 Para 1

…ly the same matters.[23] [22] See Hunter v Chief Constable of the West Midands Police (1982) AC 529 at 536. [23] See Johnson v Gore Wood & Co (2002) 2 AC 1.…
Johnson v Gore Wood & Co
(2001) 2 AC 1 Para 1

…g with, in essence, exactly the same matters.[23] [22] See Hunter v Chief Constable of the West Midands Police (1982) AC 529 at 536. [23] See Johnson v Gore Wood & Co (2002) 2 AC 1.…

Legislation cited in this decision · 4

Disability Discrimination Act 1992 (Cth)
1 mention (from Para 3)
Federal Court Rules 1979 (Cth)
1 mention (from Para 1)
Federal Magistrates Court Rules 2001 (Cth)
1 mention (from Para 1)
Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Commission Act 1986 (Cth)
1 mention