X v University of Western Sydney

In the case of X v University of Western Sydney, the plaintiff sought to challenge the decision made by the University of Western Sydney to suspend him on the grounds of alleged serious misconduct. The plaintiff argued that the decision to suspend him was made in breach of the obligation to afford procedural fairness. The court was required to determine whether the decision-maker breached the obligation to afford procedural fairness by not disclosing certain statements made in an interview with the complainant prior to the decision to suspend the plaintiff. The court also had to consider whether the decision-maker had an apprehended bias due to an earlier decision in favour of suspension, and whether the decision was affected by error as to jurisdictional facts or jurisdictional error or improper purpose or Wednesbury unreasonableness.

The court found that the decision to suspend the plaintiff was made in breach of the obligation to afford procedural fairness. The court held that the decision-maker was required to disclose the interview material to the plaintiff before making the decision to suspend him, in order to give the plaintiff an opportunity to respond on the issue of any risk to health and safety of the complainant and on the issue of measures to minimise any risk alternative to outright suspension. The court also found that there was no apprehended bias on the part of the decision-maker and that the decision was not affected by error as to jurisdictional facts or jurisdictional error or improper purpose or Wednesbury unreasonableness.

The court granted the plaintiff's application for relief, declaring that the decision to suspend the plaintiff was not validly made and is of no force and effect. The court also granted leave to the parties in respect of injunctive relief claimed. The University of Western Sydney was ordered to pay the costs of the proceeding.