Event and Time
Event Description
- The case involves an application for judicial review of a decision made by an arbiter under Part 6 Division 5 of the Local Government Act 2020.
- The plaintiff, Mr. Alexander Lew, a former Councillor of Stonnington City Council, was found to have engaged in misconduct related to disparaging social media posts about other Councillors and a member of the public, Mr. Brendan Corr.
- The arbiter, Mr. Blacher, imposed sanctions on Mr. Lew, which he completed before resigning.
- Mr. Lew is seeking a declaration that the arbiter's decision was unlawful and of no effect, raising concerns on statutory interpretation regarding 'misconduct' and 'the role of a Councillor'.
Application and Claims
- Mr. Lew's claims for judicial review are grounded on five specific arguments, primarily questioning the interpretation of 'misconduct' and the legitimate conduct expected of a Councillor.
- Cr Morgan, the second defendant, did not participate actively in the proceedings, while the arbiter offered submissions to assist the Court.
Judicial Decisions
- The Court upheld the arbiter’s decision, stating that he did not make any material legal error. The phrase "in performing the role of a Councillor" was interpreted to include behavior related to communicating with the public about Council matters.
Dispute Points and Legal Basis
Dispute Points
- Mr. Lew's Arguments:
- Contesting the definition of misconduct and its application to his social media posts. - Arguing that the arbiter exceeded his jurisdiction and misinterpreted the role of a Councillor. - Asserting that the posts in question were not made while performing Councillor duties.
- Arbiter's Position:
- Maintains that Mr. Lew's comments were made in a manner connected to his role as Councillor. - The arbiter understood his jurisdiction correctly and did not misinterpret statutory provisions related to misconduct. - Focused on the need for Councillors to engage with the community, which includes public communication.