It is proposed that this article be deleted because of the following concern:
If you can address this concern by improving, copyediting, sourcing, renaming, or merging the page, please edit this page and do so. You may remove this message if you improve the article or otherwise object to deletion for any reason. Although not required, you are encouraged to explain why you object to the deletion, either in your edit summary or on the talk page. If this template is removed, do not replace it . The article may be deleted if this message remains in place for seven days, i.e., after 08:01, 30 March 2025 (UTC). Find sources: "Marine Appeal Tribunal" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · JSTOR |
Another editor has reviewed this page's proposed deletion , endorses the proposal to delete, and adds: If you remove the {{proposed deletion/dated}} tag above, please also remove this {{Proposed deletion endorsed}} tag. |
![]() | It has been suggested that this article be merged into New South Wales Civil and Administrative Tribunal . (Discuss) Proposed since January 2025. |
The Marine Appeal Tribunal of New South Wales, is a former tribunal in New South Wales, a state of Australia, which dealt with appeals from decisions of the NSW Minister for Ports under certain decisions under the Marine Safety Act 1998 (NSW). The tribunal is now constituted under the New South Wales Civil and Administrative Tribunal.
The tribunal was constituted under the Marine Safety Act 1998 (NSW). It sat as a three-member panel. The former chairperson of the tribunal was a magistrate of the Local Court of New South Wales appointed by the Attorney General of New South Wales. The other two panel members consisted of persons nominated by the Minister for Ports and by a person nominated by the appellant.
The tribunal was unusual in that the parties to the dispute could nominate the persons who sat on the tribunal. The usual situation in the state was that the Governor of New South Wales could appoint the members independently based on their knowledge and expertise.
Each member of the panel was required to take an oath that he or she will perform the duties of a member faithfully and fearlessly. The appeal was then run in the manner determined by the chairperson. The tribunal was not bound by the rules of evidence and could obtain information in any way it thinks fit within reason. In reaching a decision on the appeal, the tribunal applied such standards with respect to the objection as it considers to be reasonable in the circumstances.
The chairperson may dismiss the appeal immediately if he or she determines that the appellant is not adversely affected by the minister's decision. Otherwise, the decision of the tribunal is by way of majority.
There was no office for the tribunal as it was only called into existence when a dispute arises.