Australia, July 9 -- New South Wales Land and Environment Court issued text of the following judgement:
1 Before the Commission are two notices of motion.
2. The first is a notice of motion filed by the Respondent in the substantive proceeding on 15 April 2025, seeking the following orders:
1) The proceedings commenced by Application for Relief from Victimisation filed on 10 March 2025 be dismissed under Rule 13.4 of the Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 2005.
2) In the alternative to (1) above, the whole of the Application filed on 10 March 2025 be struck out under Rule 14.28(1)(a) and/or (b) of the Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 2005.
3) Such further or other order as the Commission may deem fit.
3. The Respondent relies on two affidavits affirmed by Ms Gemma McGreal, a solicitor employed in the office of the Crown Solicitor, who has carriage of the matter on behalf of the Respondent under the supervision of Mr Thomas Poberrzny-Lynch, subject to the direction and control of Karen Smith, the Crown Solicitor. Both affidavits attached copies of correspondence, the details of which will be discussed below. The first affidavit is dated 15 April 2025 and the second is dated 17 April 2025.
4. The Respondent also relies upon written submissions filed on 23 April 2025 (RS).
5. The Applicant, in response to the Respondent's motion, relies on a bundle of documents filed on 14 May 2025 containing:
1) written submissions (AS);
2) an email sent by the Applicant's solicitor, Mr Harsh Thakur, to Mr Poberezney-Lynch dated 1 April 2025;
3) an email sent by Mr Thakur to Mr Poberezney-Lynch dated 11 April 2025;
4) transcript of the proceeding before me on 30 March 2025, 4 April 2025 and 15 April 2025; and
5) a copy of my interlocutory decision delivered in the proceeding on 15 April 2025, dismissing a notice of motion filed by the Applicant on 3 April 2025: Kumari v State of New South Wales, NSW Treasury [2025] NSWIRComm 1015.
6. The second notice of motion was filed by the Applicant on 20 May 2025, the day the Respondent's notice of motion was initially listed for hearing. The notice of motion as filed sought the following relief:
1) that "the Respondent's Notice of Motion dated 15 April 2025 be dismissed in its entirety, along with the Respondent's submissions on the Summary Dismissal/Strike-Out Motion dated 23 April 2025 and the further affidavit dated 23 April 2025, as the further affidavit was filed without leave of the Commission";
2) that "Commissioner J McDonald be recused from any further involvement in these proceedings... due to concerns of apprehended bias";
3) that "the matter be re-determined by a differently constituted Commission, in accordance with the principles of procedural fairness and the correct application of statutory provisions. This includes the proper application of Section 210(2), which the Commission failed to apply in the Order dated 15 April 2025";
4) "the reinstatement of the Notice of Motion (filed on 3 April 2025) and supporting affidavit, which was dismissed on 15 April 2025."
5) "that the Commission take corrective steps to address the procedural defects in these proceedings, including the incorrect application of the statutory burden of proof, the failure to consider critical evidence, and the mischaracterization of legal arguments";
*Rest of the document can be viewed at: (https://www.caselaw.nsw.gov.au/decision/197581352c7995fc10c1aafc)
Disclaimer: Curated by HT Syndication.
