Keasey v Director of Housing

(2022) 66 VR 45; [2022] VSCA 7

Victorian Court of Appeal

Built by Barristers,
For Australian Law.

See how it works

Interrogate

Catchwords

1. Administrative Law
2. › Judicial review
3. › Decisions amenable to review
4. › Meaning of 'decision'
5. › Whether application to tribunal by landlord is a 'decision' operating in law to determine a question affecting rights
6. › Administrative Law Act 1978 (Vic), s 2, s 8
1. Administrative Law
2. › Judicial review
3. › Anterior or intermediate decisions
4. › Whether precondition to exercise of tribunal jurisdiction is a reviewable decision
5. › Distinction between initiating process and determining rights
6. › Administrative Law Act 1978 (Vic), s 2
1. Administrative Law
2. › Reasons for decision
3. › Obligation to provide reasons
4. › Scope of obligation under Administrative Law Act 1978 (Vic), s 8
5. › Whether obligation extends to decision to commence proceedings
1. Residential Tenancies
2. › COVID-19 temporary measures
3. › Termination of tenancy
4. › Application to VCAT under Part 16
5. › Whether landlord's application to VCAT is a reviewable decision
6. › Residential Tenancies Act 1997 (Vic), ss 544, 547, 548, 549

Quick Take

A landlord's application to VCAT under s 548 of the Residential Tenancies Act 1997 (as amended by COVID-19 temporary measures) is not a 'decision' under the Administrative Law Act 1978 (Vic) and does not give rise to an obligation to provide reasons. More broadly, the mere commencement of proceedings in a tribunal does not constitute a reviewable decision where the application does not itself alter the applicant's rights and the power to determine questions affecting rights is reposed in the tribunal. The obligation on a public authority under s 38 of the Charter to consider human rights does not convert every such consideration into a 'decision' that determines a question affecting rights under the ALA.