Suppose I was involved in a complex legal matter against a government agency and have already had a hearing at the Administrative and Equal Opportunity Division NCAT. Suppose I made very serious allegations about a government cover-up, with a papertrail leading back to a Minister and provided evidence to substantiate all of my claims.
Suppose at the planning meeting for the hearing I had asked for more time to prepare my submissions because I felt I had been denied procedural fairness, but this was refused because my dispute with the agency had alreadu been going on for 2 years (none of my doing). Is it normal for me to have a hearing and then for the following to occur?
15 months
Solicitors for the respondent send an e-mail to the NCAT registrar and ask when the Senior Member who heard the case thinks a decision will be ready to be handed down. (I have been CCed in on all the correspondence). No reply.
18 months
Solicitors for the respondent send an e-mail to the NCAT registrar and ask again. No reply.
21 months
Solicitors for the respondent send an e-mail to the NCAT registrar and ask again. No reply.
24 months
Solicitors for the respondent send an e-mail to the NCAT registrar and ask again. Then call to confirm they have received that e-mail. No reply. Then around a week later, write a letter to the Deputy President enquiring about this and state:
Then receive a reply apologising for not responding to earlier enquiries and that the decision will be published in 3 weeks.
---
I have never been in involved in any legal matter before. Furthermore, I don't have a lawyer. For this reason, I have no idea what norms are regarding these sorts of things. However, this is what I think:
I think this is exceptionally strange. The reason why it think this is because from my reading of the cases, the average wait time is ~6 months. So for a decision to be reserved for two years is highly anomalous. The strangeness of this is compounded by the fact that repeated enquiries have not been responded to, not even with a "I'm not sure, I can't give you an estimate".
I have included from the Annual Report regarding service standards and clearance ratio. If I'm being completely honest, I have no idea how to interpret this.
So I guess my question is, factoring in matters relating to COVID-19 can someone tell me how strange is this e.g. a little strange, very strange, exceptionally strange, or is this absolutely totally unheard of?
I could explain what happened next, but I just wanted to know this part because it will help me better understand what's going on.
Suppose at the planning meeting for the hearing I had asked for more time to prepare my submissions because I felt I had been denied procedural fairness, but this was refused because my dispute with the agency had alreadu been going on for 2 years (none of my doing). Is it normal for me to have a hearing and then for the following to occur?
15 months
Solicitors for the respondent send an e-mail to the NCAT registrar and ask when the Senior Member who heard the case thinks a decision will be ready to be handed down. (I have been CCed in on all the correspondence). No reply.
18 months
Solicitors for the respondent send an e-mail to the NCAT registrar and ask again. No reply.
21 months
Solicitors for the respondent send an e-mail to the NCAT registrar and ask again. No reply.
24 months
Solicitors for the respondent send an e-mail to the NCAT registrar and ask again. Then call to confirm they have received that e-mail. No reply. Then around a week later, write a letter to the Deputy President enquiring about this and state:
Then receive a reply apologising for not responding to earlier enquiries and that the decision will be published in 3 weeks.
---
I have never been in involved in any legal matter before. Furthermore, I don't have a lawyer. For this reason, I have no idea what norms are regarding these sorts of things. However, this is what I think:
I think this is exceptionally strange. The reason why it think this is because from my reading of the cases, the average wait time is ~6 months. So for a decision to be reserved for two years is highly anomalous. The strangeness of this is compounded by the fact that repeated enquiries have not been responded to, not even with a "I'm not sure, I can't give you an estimate".
I have included from the Annual Report regarding service standards and clearance ratio. If I'm being completely honest, I have no idea how to interpret this.
So I guess my question is, factoring in matters relating to COVID-19 can someone tell me how strange is this e.g. a little strange, very strange, exceptionally strange, or is this absolutely totally unheard of?
I could explain what happened next, but I just wanted to know this part because it will help me better understand what's going on.
