Treloar v Commissioner for Consumer Affairs

SUPREME COURT OF SOUTH AUSTRALIA

(Court of Appeal: Civil)

TRELOAR v COMMISSIONER FOR CONSUMER AFFAIRS

[2021] SASCA 60

Reasons of the Court of Appeal  

(The Honourable Justice Doyle, the Honourable Justice Livesey and the Honourable Justice Bleby)

9 June 2021

ADMINISTRATIVE LAW - JUDICIAL REVIEW - REVIEWABLE DECISIONS AND CONDUCT

APPEAL AND NEW TRIAL - APPEAL - GENERAL PRINCIPLES

The applicant sought leave to appeal against the decision of a Presidential Member of the South Australian Civil and Administrative Tribunal (SACAT) to refuse to grant permission to proceed with a “review” under s 70(1) of the South Australian Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2013 (SA). The applicant sought a review of the refusal by a Senior Member to grant a 12-month adjournment of disciplinary proceedings brought by the Commissioner for Consumer Affairs concerning alleged breaches of the Second-hand Vehicle Dealers Act 1995 (SA).

The applicant sought the adjournment to allow him to raise funds to secure legal representation.

Held, refusing the application for leave to appeal:

1.The appeal is not reasonably arguable and it is not in the interests of justice to grant leave to appeal.

South Australian Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2013 (SA) s 3, s 70, s 71; South Australian Civil and Administrative Tribunal Regulations 2015 (SA) regulation 4; Uniform Civil Rules 2020 (SA) r 212.3, referred to.
Dietrich v The Queen (1992) 177 CLR 292; Fiorentino v Companies Auditors and Liquidators Disciplinary Board [2014] FCA 641; Hegarty v Keogh [2021] SASCA 46; Jackson v Lepp Investments Pty Ltd (2016) 125 SASR 1; Pix v South Australian Housing Trust (2016) 125 SASR 10; Re AKS [2016] SACAT 19; Rose v South Australian Housing Authority [2021] SASCA 9, considered.

TRELOAR v COMMISSIONER FOR CONSUMER AFFAIRS
[2021] SASCA 60

Court of Appeal – Civil: Doyle, Livesey and Bleby JJA

THE COURT:

1. This is an application for leave to appeal from a decision of a Presidential Member of the South Australian Civil and Administrative Tribunal (the Tribunal).

2. Leave to appeal is required by s 71(2) of the South Australian Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2013 (SA) (the SACAT Act). By s 71(1) of the SACAT Act and r 212.3(1)(a)(ii) of the Uniform Civil Rules 2020 (SA), the appellate jurisdiction of the Supreme Court is to be exercised by the Court of Appeal because the proposed appeal is against a decision of a Presidential Member of the Tribunal.

3. By Notice of Appeal filed on 19 March 2021, the applicant seeks leave to appeal against the President’s refusal to grant permission to proceed with a “review” under s 70(1) of the SACAT Act.  The applicant sought a review of the refusal by a Senior Member to grant a 12-month adjournment of disciplinary proceedings brought by the Commissioner for Consumer Affairs concerning alleged breaches of the Second-hand Vehicle Dealers Act 1995 (SA).

4. The grounds relied on by the applicant, who is unrepresented, are to the effect that he is without…