Wagh and Australian Postal Corporation

Administrative Appeals Tribunal

DECISION AND REASONS FOR DECISION [2008] AATA 676

ADMINISTRATIVE APPEALS TRIBUNAL      )

)          No 2007/0331

GENERAL ADMINISTRATIVE DIVISION		)
Re		VASANT WAGH

Applicant

And AUSTRALIAN POSTAL CORPORATION

Respondent

DECISION

Tribunal Ms G Ettinger, Senior Member

Date5 August 2008

PlaceSydney

DECISION

Decision

I decide as follows with regard to each of the issues considered at the Directions Hearing and Hearing of Summons on 16 July 2008, and for the reasons discussed below.

I am not satisfied that details regarding an allegation of conflict of interest have been submitted by Mr Wagh. I am mindful of the Respondent’s submissions in that regard, and I am satisfied that I have no conflict of interest in hearing Mr Wagh’s application.

I am not satisfied that Mr Wagh has made an application pursuant to section 21A of the Act for the Tribunal to be reconstituted. I am properly constituted to hear the application.

I have considered the Respondent’s application that Mr Wagh’s application be dismissed as vexatious or frivolous, and I decline to so dismiss it.

I do not agree to issue the Summons Mr Wagh has requested be issued to Telstra Corporation.

I am satisfied that Mr Wagh has shown disregard towards the Directions of the Tribunal, and for the procedures of the Tribunal. I dismiss Mr Wagh’s application for review pursuant to section 42A(2)(a) of the Act for failing to attend two Hearings of interlocutory matters at the Tribunal when he had notice of them. I further exercise the discretion to also dismiss Mr Wagh’s application pursuant to section 42A(5)(b) for failing within a reasonable time to comply with Directions of the Tribunal in relation to his application for review.

.................[sgd].............................

Ms G Ettinger   

Senior Member

MATTERS TO BE ADDRESSED BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL ON 16 JULY 2008

9.      Both parties wrote to the Tribunal in the two days preceding the Hearing of 16 July 2008. The Tribunal replied to both letters. 

10.     In my reply dated 15 July 2008 directed through the Acting District Registrar, I indicated the matters that would be addressed by way of hearing oral submissions from the parties at the Return of Summons and Directions Hearing listed for 16 July 2008. As Mr Wagh stated that he would not appear, and failed to appear, I only had before me correspondence from him, and the oral and written submissions of the Respondent who was represented by Mr Batskos. 

11.     The issues dealt with at the Hearing on 16 July 2008 were as foreshadowed in the Acting District Registrar’s letter of 15 July 2008, and follow:

(1) Mr Wagh’s allegation that Senior Member Ettinger has a conflict of interest in hearing this matter;

(2) Mr Wagh’s stated intention to apply for reconstitution of the Tribunal pursuant to section 21A of the Administrative Appeals Tribunal Act 1975;

(3) Australia Post’s application that the proceedings be dismissed as frivolous or vexatious;

(4) Documents subject of the Summons issued to Australia Post on 13 May 2008;

(5) Mr…