› ANSCI contended the Plaintiffs were estopped from challenging their expulsion on the basis that the Interim Management Committee did not have the power to do so
› whether there was a mutual assumption that the Interim Management Committee or ICC had the power to expel the Plaintiffs
› Held: the estoppel defence not made out, there being no mutual assumption established.
Equity
› Defences
› ANSCI contended that even if the Plaintiffs established a lack of power to expel there was no “practical injustice” to the Plaintiffs
› whether administrative law and migration law principles were applicable here
› Held: ANSCI had the onus of establishing the defence and failed to make it out.
ANSCI sought to raise “discretionary defences” including that the declarations sought by the Plaintiffs would be of no utility and would give rise to further disputes
› Held: there was a real utility in the declarations being made.
