Sloey v State Transit Authority

CITATION:	Sloey v State Transit [1999] NSWADT 40
DIVISION:	Equal Opportunity
APPLICANT:	Peter Eric Sloey
RESPONDENT:	State Transit Authority
FILE NUMBER:	153 of 1996
HEARING DATES:	05/31/1999
SUBMISSIONS CLOSED:	05/31/1999
DATE OF DECISION:	14 July 1999
BEFORE:	G Innes - Judicial Member R Cox - Member O McDonald - Member
PRIMARY LEGISLATION:	Anti-Discrimination Act 1977
APPLICATION:	Disability Discrimination - Employment -
MATTER FOR DECISION:	Cost application
REPRESENTATION:	Applicant: J Ryan of Writer Ryan Boesen with Hartcher Reid Solicitors Respondent: D Davies of Sparke Helmore Solicitors
ORDERS:	1. The Tribunal awards party-party costs in favour of the Complainant, and leaves the matter of assessment to be determined.

1: INTRODUCTION

1 On 2 December 1997 the Equal Opportunity Tribunal as it then was heard a complaint by Peter Sloey against the State Transit Authority under the relevant provisions of the Anti-Discrimination Act.

2 In its decision, sent by mail to the parties on 18 June 1998, the Tribunal found that the STA had discriminated against Mr Sloey on the ground of his disability in breach of the Act, and awarded him specific damages of $9, 882.29 and general damages of $6000. The decision did not address the question of costs.

3 On 25 June 1998 the complainant's solicitor contacted the Tribunal registry regarding the question of costs. He was told that this matter would be held over until after the result of any appeal. This was confirmed in a letter to the complainant's solicitor dated 17 July 1998.

4 The respondents appeal to the Supreme Court was dismissed by Barr J. on 12 March 1999, and the complainant then sought to have the question of costs considered by the Tribunal. The parties were directed to provide written submissions on the question which was set down for hearing on 31 May 1999. This decision is the result of that hearing.

2: RELEVANT LEGISLATION

5 The relevant section of the Anti-Discrimination Act is s 114. It provides-

"(1) Except as provided by section 111 (2) and subsection (2) each party to an inquiry shall pay his or her own costs.

(2) Where the Tribunal is of the opinion in a particular case that there are circumstances that justify it doing so, it may make such order as to costs and security for costs, whether by way of interim order or otherwise, as it thinks fit."

6 Section 88 of the Administrative Decisions Tribunal Act is also relevant. It provides:

"(1) Subject to the rules of the Tribunal and any other Act or law, the Tribunal may award costs in relation to proceedings before it, but only if it is satisfied that there are special circumstances warranting an award of costs.

(2) The Tribunal may:


(a) determine by whom and to what extent costs are to be paid, and

(b) order costs to be assessed on the basis set out in Division 6 of Part 11 of the Legal Profession Act 1987 or on any other basis.


(3) However, the Tribunal may not award costs…