Smith and Thales Australia Limited

This decision concerns an application by Mr Smith for an extension of time to lodge an application for review with the Tribunal, against Thales Australia Limited. The application was heard by D. J. Morris SM.

The primary legal issue before the Tribunal was whether it was fair and equitable, in all the circumstances, to grant Mr Smith an extension of time to lodge his application for review, pursuant to section 29(2) of the AAT Act, as modified. This required the Tribunal to consider the adequacy of Mr Smith's explanation for the significant delay in lodging his application.

The Tribunal considered the principle that proceedings should generally not be commenced outside statutory timeframes, as outlined in cases such as *Hunter Valley*. It found that Mr Smith had not acted promptly, having waited for almost eleven years to lodge his application. The Tribunal was satisfied that the Respondent was entitled to conclude the matter was finalised due to the lack of any indication of dissatisfaction from Mr Smith between 2006 and 2016. Consequently, the Tribunal found that Mr Smith had not provided an adequate explanation for the delay and that it was not fair and equitable to extend the time for him to lodge his application.

Mr Smith's application for an extension of time to lodge an application for review was therefore unsuccessful.