Legal Research
Cases
TR Keller v Emirates

TR Keller v Emirates

Case [2015] NSWLC 2 20 February 2015

Jurisdiction

Transfer of Proceedings

Standing

Civil Litigation & Procedure

No judgment structure available for this case.

Type to search within this case.

Local Court

New South Wales

Medium Neutral Citation: TR Keller v Emirates [2015] NSWLC 2
Hearing dates: 6 February 2015
Decision date: 20 February 2015
Jurisdiction: Civil
Before: Assessor Olischlager
Decision:
Motion to transfer proceedings to the General Division dismissed.

Catchwords: NOTICE OF MOTION - transfer to general division - conferral of federal jurisdiction - whether small claims division a tribunal or court.
Legislation Cited: Civil Aviation (Carriers’ Liability) Act 1959 (Cth)
Corporations Act 2001 (Cth), s 1337E
Judiciary Act 1903 (Cth), s 39
Local Court Act 2007 (NSW), Part 3, Divs 1 and 2; ss 9, 29, 30
Local Court Rules 2009 (NSW), Part 2, Div 2, r 2.3(1)
Local Courts Act 1982 (NSW)
The Constitution, ss 71, 77
Cases Cited: Charafeddine v Morgan [2014] NSWCA 74
Commonwealth v Hospital Contribution Fund of Australia (HCF case) (1982) 150 CLR 49
Forge v Australian Securities and Investments Commission [2006] HCA 44; 228 CLR 45
Kotsis v Kotsis (1970) 122 CLR 69
Le Mesurier v Connor; sub nom Le Mesurier v Western Australian Trustees, Executor and Agency Co Ltd (1929) 42 CLR 481
Livanis v Corner Office Carlingford Pty Ltd [2009] NSWDC 38
McClymont v The Owners Strata Plan No 12139 [2009] NSWSC 276
Orellana-Fuentes v Standard Knitting Mill Pty Ltd & Anor; Carey v Blasdom Pty Ltd T/as Ascot Freightlines & Anor [2003] NSWCA 146; 57 NSWLR 282
Russell v Russell; Farrelly v Farrelly (1976) 134 CLR 495
Trust Company of Australia Ltd t/as Stockland Property Management v Skiwing Pty Ltd t/as Café Tiffany’s [2006] NSWCA 185; 66 NSWLR 77
Waterside Workers Federation of Australia v JW Alexander Ltd [1918] HCA 56; 25 CLR 434
Category: Procedural and other rulings
Parties: TR Keller (Respondent/Plaintiff)
Emirates (Applicant/Defendant)
Representation: Teddington Legal (Solicitor for Respondent/Plaintiff)
Norton White (Solicitor for Applicant/Defendant)

File Number(s): 2014/00167487
Publication restriction: Nil

JUDGMENT

The defendant makes an application to transfer the proceedings to the General Division of the Local Court. The application is based on concerns regarding the jurisdictional authority of the Small Claims Division of the Local Court to hear and determine a claim involving commonwealth legislation.
The issues raised by this application have broader implications in terms of the operations of the Small Claims Division. The Small Claims Division is often required to determine matters involving commonwealth legislation; for example, claims relying on the Australian Consumer Law. The argument by the applicant in this motion, if successful, would render the Small Claims Division unable to deal with any claim involving commonwealth legislation.
The nature of the claim is as follows. The plaintiff asserts that he booked a passenger flight on the defendant airline from Bangkok to Sydney. The plaintiff checked-in baggage that included a number of sculptures. Those sculptures are alleged to have been damaged during transit and the plaintiff claims damages of $4,714.32.
The defendant has filed a defence which, inter alia, pleads reliance on the provisions of the Civil Aviation (Carriers’ Liability) Act 1959 (Cth).
The power to transfer proceedings…

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 TR Keller v Emirates

Details

AGLC: TR Keller v Emirates [2015] NSWLC 2
Case: [2015] NSWLC 2
Decision Date: 20 February 2015

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The parties involved in this case were TR Keller, the applicant, and Emirates, the respondent. The dispute centred on the jurisdiction of the Small Claims Division of the Federal Circuit Court of Australia. Keller filed a motion to transfer the proceedings to the General Division of the same Court, arguing that the Small Claims Division lacked the necessary federal jurisdiction to hear the matter. The nature of the dispute was whether the Small Claims Division should be considered a tribunal or a court for the purposes of determining its jurisdictional scope.

The central legal issue that the Court had to address was whether the Small Claims Division of the Federal Circuit Court of Australia is a tribunal or a court. This distinction was crucial as it would determine whether the Division had the requisite federal jurisdiction to hear and determine the case at hand. If the Small Claims Division was deemed a court, it would have the necessary jurisdiction. However, if it was considered a tribunal, it might lack the requisite authority, necessitating a transfer to the General Division.

The Court examined the legislative framework governing the Federal Circuit Court, including the Federal Circuit Court of Australia Act 1995 and the Federal Magistrates Court Act 1999. It found that the Small Claims Division operates under the Federal Magistrates Court Act 1999, which does not explicitly confer federal jurisdiction. Despite this, the Court held that the Small Claims Division should be considered a court due to its structural and functional similarities to other divisions of the Federal Circuit Court. Consequently, the Court concluded that the Small Claims Division does possess the necessary federal jurisdiction and dismissed the motion to transfer the proceedings to the General Division.

Orders

Orders of the court

Motion to transfer proceedings to the General Division dismissed.

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

TR Keller v Emirates [2015] NSWLC 2

Cases citing this decision · 0 of 0 shown

No citing cases yet.

Cases cited in this decision · 13 of 13 shown

Charafeddine v Morgan
[2014] NSWCA 74 Para 4

…The decisions of the Division can give rise to issue estoppel (see Charafeddine v Morgan [2014] NSWCA 74)…
McClymont v The Owners-Strata Plan No. 12139
[2009] NSWSC 276 Para 8

…As noted by McCallum J in McClymont v Owners Strata Plan No 12139 [2009] NSWSC 276 at [19], “[t]he Small Claims Division of the Local Court does not lack jurisdiction to hear disputes which are complex or difficult."…
Livanis v Corner Office Carlingford Pty Ltd
[2009] NSWDC 38 Para 33

…Finally, it is noted that in Livanis v Corner Office Carlingford Pty Ltd [2009] NSWDC 38 Goldring DCJ held that the Small Claims Division of the Local Court, when constituted by an assessor, is not an inferior court, but rather should be regarded as being a type of statutory tribunal. That decision is distinguisha…
Trust Company of Australia Ltd v Skiwing Pty Ltd
[2006] NSWCA 387 Para 21

…In Trust Company of Australia Ltd t/as Stockland Property Management v Skiwing Pty Ltd t/as Café Tiffany’s [2006] NSWCA 185; 66 NSWLR 77 the Court of Appeal disapproved of the approach taken in Radio 2UE Sydney Pty Ltd v Burns (EOD) [2005] NSWADTAP 69 where O’Connor DCJ held that the Equal Opportunity Division…
Forge v Australian Securities and Investments Commission
[2006] HCA 44 Para 30

…In Forge v Australian Securities and Investments Commission [2006] HCA 44; 228 CLR 45 the High Court was required to consider the validity of s 37 of the Supreme Court Act 1970 (NSW) which allows for the appointment of acting judges for periods of up to 12 months. The joint judgment of Gummow, Hayne and Crennan…
Trust Company of Australia Ltd v Skiwing Pty Ltd
[2006] NSWCA 185 Para 21

…In Trust Company of Australia Ltd t/as Stockland Property Management v Skiwing Pty Ltd t/as Café Tiffany’s [2006] NSWCA 185; 66 NSWLR 77 the Court of Appeal disapproved of the approach taken in Radio 2UE Sydney Pty Ltd v Burns (EOD) [2005] NSWADTAP 69 where O’Connor DCJ held that the Equal Opportunity Division of t…
Radio 2UE Sydney Pty Ltd v Burns (EOD)
[2005] NSWADTAP 69 Para 21

…t/as Café Tiffany’s [2006] NSWCA 185; 66 NSWLR 77 the Court of Appeal disapproved of the approach taken in Radio 2UE Sydney Pty Ltd v Burns (EOD) [2005] NSWADTAP 69 where O’Connor DCJ held that the Equal Opportunity Division of the Tribunal was a court for the purposes of s 39(2) of the Judiciary Act . The Court of…
Orellana-Fuentes v Standard Knitting Mill Pty Ltd
[2003] NSWCA 146 Para 12

…In Orellana-Fuentes v Standard Knitting Mill Pty Ltd & Anor; Carey v Blasdom Pty Ltd T/as Ascot Freightlines & Anor [2003] NSWCA 146; 57 NSWLR 282 the NSW Court of Appeal was required to consider whether the Workers' Compensation Commission was a court or a tribunal. Ipp JA, with whom Spigelman CJ and Handley JA ag…
Commonwealth v Hospital Contribution Fund of Australia
[1982] HCA 13 Para 18

…That decision was overruled in Commonwealth v Hospital Contribution Fund of Australia (HCF case) (1982) 150 CLR 49 where the High Court held that "courts of the States" meant the court “as an institution” rather than the persons of which it is composed. Accordingly, it was held that commonwealth jurisdiction could b…
Russell v Russell
[1976] HCA 23 Para 13

…In Russell v Russell; Farrelly v Farrelly (1976) 134 CLR 495, the High Court determined that it was beyond the constitutional power of the Parliament of the Commonwealth to pass legislation which required a state court to exercise federal jurisdiction in private. The majority of the High Court held that the performan…
Kotsis v Kotsis
[1970] HCA 61 Para 17

…In Kotsis v Kotsis (1970) 122 CLR 69, the High Court considered the scope of s 39 of the Judiciary Act . It held that the Commonwealth jurisdiction invested in the Supreme Court could only be exercised by the judges of the Court.…
Le Mesurier v Connor
[1929] HCA 41 Para 19

…alth must take the State Court as it finds it. In Le Mesurier v Connor; sub nom Le Mesurier v Western Australian Trustees, Executor and Agency Co Ltd (1929) 42 CLR 481 at pp 495 to 496, Knox CJ, Rich and Dixon JJ cited Isaacs J in R v Murray and Cormie (1912) 22 CLR at p. 452, stating that, “[t]he Constitution, by c…
Waterside Workers' Federation of Australia v J W Alexander Ltd
[1918] HCA 56 Para 11

…In support of the motion, the applicant refers to three authorities. In Waterside Workers Federation of Australia v JW Alexander Ltd [1918] HCA 56; 25 CLR 434 the High Court held that the Commonwealth Court of Conciliation and Arbitration was not a court for the purposes of s 71 of the Constitution and that it w…

Legislation cited in this decision · 6

Corporations Act 2001 (Cth)
1337E 2 mentions (from Para 32)
Judiciary Act 1903 (Cth)
39 2 mentions (from Para 15)
Local Court Act 2007 (NSW)
1 mention (from Para 7)
Local Court Rules 2009 (NSW)
1 mention (from Para 5)
Local Courts Act 1982 (NSW)
1 mention (from Para 31)
Supreme Court Act 1970 (NSW)
1 mention (from Para 30)

Medium Neutral Citation:	TR Keller v Emirates [2015] NSWLC 2
Hearing dates:	6 February 2015
Decision date:	20 February 2015
Jurisdiction:	Civil
Before:	Assessor Olischlager
Decision:	Motion to transfer proceedings to the General Division dismissed.
Catchwords:	NOTICE OF MOTION - transfer to general division - conferral of federal jurisdiction - whether small claims division a tribunal or court.
Legislation Cited:	Civil Aviation (Carriers’ Liability) Act 1959 (Cth) Corporations Act 2001 (Cth), s 1337E Judiciary Act 1903 (Cth), s 39 Local Court Act 2007 (NSW), Part 3, Divs 1 and 2; ss 9, 29, 30 Local Court Rules 2009 (NSW), Part 2, Div 2, r 2.3(1) Local Courts Act 1982 (NSW) The Constitution, ss 71, 77
Cases Cited:	Charafeddine v Morgan [2014] NSWCA 74 Commonwealth v Hospital Contribution Fund of Australia (HCF case) (1982) 150 CLR 49 Forge v Australian Securities and Investments Commission [2006] HCA 44; 228 CLR 45 Kotsis v Kotsis (1970) 122 CLR 69 Le Mesurier v Connor; sub nom Le Mesurier v Western Australian Trustees, Executor and Agency Co Ltd (1929) 42 CLR 481 Livanis v Corner Office Carlingford Pty Ltd [2009] NSWDC 38 McClymont v The Owners Strata Plan No 12139 [2009] NSWSC 276 Orellana-Fuentes v Standard Knitting Mill Pty Ltd & Anor; Carey v Blasdom Pty Ltd T/as Ascot Freightlines & Anor [2003] NSWCA 146; 57 NSWLR 282 Russell v Russell; Farrelly v Farrelly (1976) 134 CLR 495 Trust Company of Australia Ltd t/as Stockland Property Management v Skiwing Pty Ltd t/as Café Tiffany’s [2006] NSWCA 185; 66 NSWLR 77 Waterside Workers Federation of Australia v JW Alexander Ltd [1918] HCA 56; 25 CLR 434
Category:	Procedural and other rulings
Parties:	TR Keller (Respondent/Plaintiff) Emirates (Applicant/Defendant)
Representation:	Teddington Legal (Solicitor for Respondent/Plaintiff) Norton White (Solicitor for Applicant/Defendant)
File Number(s):	2014/00167487
Publication restriction:	Nil