WL v Randwick City Council

CITATION:	WL v Randwick City Council [2008] NSWADT 87
DIVISION:	General Division
PARTIES:	APPLICANT In person RESPONDENT A Seton, solicitor
FILE NUMBER:	073294
HEARING DATES:	On the papers
SUBMISSIONS CLOSED:	18 February 2008
DATE OF DECISION:	18 March 2008
BEFORE:	Montgomery S - Judicial Member
CATCHWORDS:	Bias
MATTER FOR DECISION:	Preliminary matter
LEGISLATION CITED:	Administrative Decisions Tribunal Act 1997 Privacy and Personal Information Protection Act 1998
CASES CITED:	Ebner v Official Trustee and Bankruptcy [2000] HCA 63 Jae Kyung LEE v Bob Chae-Sang CHA & ORS [2008] NSWCA 13 Johnson v Johnson [2000] HCA 48 Re JRL; Ex parte CJL [1986] HCA 39 Seltsam Pty Limited v Ghaleb [2005] NSWCA 208 WL v Randwick City Council (GD) [2007] NSWADTAP 58 WL v Randwick City Council [2007] NSWADT 12 Z v Director General, Department of Transport (No.2) (GD) [2001] NSW ADTAP 18
REPRESENTATION:	APPLICANT In person RESPONDENT A Seton, solicitor
ORDERS:	1. WL’s application for an order disqualifying myself from the further hearing of these proceedings is dismissed 2. The matter is set down for further directions at 2.00 pm. on Tuesday 22 April 2008.

REASONS FOR DECISION

1 In these reasons the names of all private individuals have been anonymised so as to preserve the privacy of their personal affairs. In these reasons the Applicant is referred to as WL.

2 The substantive matter is an application pursuant to section 55 of the Privacy and Personal Information Protection Act 1998 ("the Privacy Act") for a review of the conduct of the Randwick City Council in relation to its dealing with alleged personal information of WL. The matter previously came before me for a preliminary issue of jurisdiction and I dismissed the application for want of jurisdiction. My reasons for determination on that issue are recorded in WL v Randwick City Council [2007] NSWADT 12 (“the earlier decision”). WL successfully appealed that determination. The Appeal Panel’s determination is recorded as WL v Randwick City Council (GD) [2007] NSWADTAP 58 (“the Appeal Panel’s decision”). The Appeal Panel made the following orders:

1. The decision of the Tribunal is set aside;

2. Leave to extend to the merits refused;

3. The application is remitted to the Tribunal for re-determination having regard to these reasons.

3 The matter came back before me in October 2007. At that time the parties agreed to attempt to mediate the issues in dispute. The mediation was unsuccessful and the matter has now come before me for re-determination.

4 WL has brought an application for me to disqualify myself from continuing to hear the proceedings on the basis of bias and prejudice. The Respondent does not object to me continuing to hear the matter.

5 WL requested that he be permitted to file written submissions in support of his application and I agreed to that request. Each party has filed submissions and WL has filed submissions in reply.

6 WL’s submissions are extremely detailed, cover a range of issues and make many allegations. Much of this is unrelated…