Civil Aviation Safety Authority v Ovens

[2011] FCAFC 75

Full Court of the Federal Court6 June 2011

Built by Barristers,
For Australian Law.

See how it works

Interrogate

Catchwords

1. Administrative Law
2. › Administrative Appeals Tribunal
3. › Procedural fairness
4. › Introduction of new policy document at close of evidence
5. › Whether party given reasonable opportunity to address document
6. › Whether hearing should have been adjourned
7. › Administrative Appeals Tribunal Act 1975 (Cth), s 39(1)
1. Administrative Law
2. › Administrative Appeals Tribunal
3. › Role of government policy in merits review
4. › Whether policy binding on Tribunal
5. › Whether Tribunal entitled to treat policy as only relevant factor
6. › Obligation to consider merits of particular case
1. Administrative Law
2. › Administrative Appeals Tribunal
3. › Procedural fairness
4. › Materiality of denial
5. › Whether denial could not have affected outcome
6. › Whether only one possible outcome existed
1. Administrative Law
2. › Civil aviation
3. › Medical certificates
4. › Conditions on medical certificates
5. › Construction of reg 67.195
6. › Whether Tribunal misconstrued regulation by grafting conditions from reg 67.180
7. › Civil Aviation Safety Regulations 1998 (Cth), regs 67.180, 67.195

Quick Take

Where a government policy document is introduced at the close of evidence in AAT proceedings and the Tribunal relies on it in its decision, the Tribunal must adjourn to afford the affected party a reasonable opportunity to address the policy, including its applicability, its application to the particular case, and whether evidence and submissions should be directed to it. The fact that a policy has been published does not mean there is only one possible outcome, because the policy is legally no more than a starting point in the Tribunal's discretionary decision-making.