Seidler v Royal Melbourne Institute of Technology

Seidler (the applicant) brought proceedings against the Royal Melbourne Institute of Technology (RMIT) (the respondent) in the Supreme Court of Victoria. The applicant sought to challenge RMIT's decision to terminate his enrolment in the Bachelor of Arts (Honours) program. The dispute centred on whether RMIT had followed its own procedures and acted fairly in reaching its decision to terminate the applicant's enrolment.

The primary legal issues before the court were whether RMIT had breached its contractual obligations to the applicant, and whether RMIT had acted in a manner that was procedurally unfair or unreasonable in terminating his enrolment. Specifically, the court was asked to consider whether RMIT had provided the applicant with adequate notice of the grounds for termination and a sufficient opportunity to respond, and whether the decision-making process itself was fair and rational.

Judge Cameron found that RMIT had breached its contractual obligations to the applicant by failing to adhere to its own published procedures for student discipline and academic review. The court held that these procedures formed part of the contract between RMIT and its students, and that RMIT's failure to follow them constituted a breach. Furthermore, the court determined that RMIT's actions were procedurally unfair, as the applicant was not given adequate notice of the specific allegations against him nor a proper opportunity to present his case before the decision to terminate his enrolment was made. The court emphasised the importance of natural justice in administrative decision-making, particularly when a student's educational future is at stake.

The court ordered that RMIT's decision to terminate the applicant's enrolment be set aside. RMIT was also ordered to pay the applicant's costs.