MetLife Insurance Limited v Australian Financial Complaints Authority

• Jurisdiction: Australia Federal only
• Judgment Date: 27 January 2022
• Neutral Citation: [2022] FCA 23
• Court: Federal Court
• Date: 27 January 2022

Federal Court of Australia

MetLife Insurance Limited v Australian Financial Complaints Authority [2022] FCA 23

File number:	NSD 747 of 2019
Judgment of:	COLVIN J
Date of judgment:	27 January 2022
Catchwords:	CORPORATIONS - where Australian Financial Complaints Authority (AFCA) determined two complaints - first complaint was taken over from Financial Industry Ombudsman Service by AFCA after creation of AFCA as a one-stop shop for dispute resolution - second complaint made to AFCA not of a kind listed in s 1053(a) of the Corporations Act 2001 (Cth) - whether s 1053(a) defines the extent of 'superannuation complaints' - whether novation of agreement to determine first complaint - alternatively, whether ad hoc agreements for AFCA to determine complaints - appropriate role of AFCA in proceedings
Legislation:	Acts Interpretation Act 1901 (Cth) s 13 Corporations Act 2001 (Cth) ss 5C, 761A, 761G, 761GA, 766A, 912A, 912B, 1051, 1052, 1052B, 1052BA, 1052C, 1052D, 1052E, 1053, 1054, 1054A, 1054B, 1054C, 1055, 1055B, 1055D, 1057, Part 7.10A, Division 3 Legislative Instruments Act 2003 (Cth) s 2 Retirement Savings Accounts Act 1997 (Cth) ss 7, 15 Superannuation (Resolution of Complaints) Act 1993 (Cth) s 37 Superannuation Industry (Supervision) Act 1993 (Cth) Treasury Laws Amendment (Putting Consumers First - Establishment of the Australian Financial Complaints Authority) Act 2018 (Cth)
Cases cited:	Attorney-General (Cth) v Breckler (1999) 197 CLR 83 Aylett v Peter Rowland Catering Pty Ltd [2008] VSC 467 Chappell as executor of the estate of Hitchcock v Goldspan Investments Pty Ltd [2021] WASCA 205 Fagan v Crimes Compensation Tribunal (1982) 150 CLR 666 Financial Ombudsman Services Ltd v Utopia Financial Services Pty Ltd [2016] WASC 55 Freedom Foods Pty Ltd v Blue Diamond Growers [2021] FCAFC 86 Freedom Pharmaceutical Pty Ltd v Minister for Health (No 2) [2021] FCA 1250 Glencore Coal Assets Australia Pty Ltd v Australian Competition Tribunal [2020] FCAFC 145; (2020) 280 FCR 194 Hancock Prospecting Pty Ltd v Rinehart [2017] FCAFC 170; (2017) 257 FCR 442 Hatfield v Health Insurance Commission (1987) 15 FCR 487 Horsell International Pty Ltd v Divetwo Pty Ltd [2013] NSWCA 368 Huon Aquaculture Group Limited v Minister for the Environment (No 2) [2018] FCA 1938 Investors Exchange Ltd v Australian Financial Complaints Authority Ltd [2020] QSC 74 Kostas v HIA Insurance Services Pty Ltd [2010] HCA 32; (2010) 241 CLR 390 Minister for Immigration and Multicultural Affairs v Singh [2000] FCA 845; (2000) 98 FCR 469 Murlan Consulting Pty Ltd v Ku-ring-gai Municipal Council [2009] NSWCA 300 Najjar v Haines (1991) 25 NSWLR 224 Ogawa v Australian Information Commissioner [2014] FCA 229 Patersons Securities Ltd v Financial Ombudsman Service Ltd [2015] WASC 321 Pearlman v WA A/Information Commissioner [2019] WASC 257 (S) Port of Newcastle Operations Pty Limited v Glencore Coal Assets Australia Pty Ltd [2021] HCA 39 QSuper Board v Australian Financial Complaints Authority Limited [2020] FCAFC 55; (2020) 276 FCR 97 R v Australian Broadcasting Tribunal; Ex parte Hardiman (1980) 144 CLR 13 R v Khazaal [2012] HCA 26; (2012) 246 CLR 601 Rinehart v Hancock Prospecting Pty Ltd [2019] HCA 13; (2019) 267 CLR 514 Sayseng v Kellogg Superannuation Pty Ltd [2003] NSWSC 945 Secretary, Department of Family and Community Services v Hayward (a pseudonym) [2018] NSWCA 209; (2018) 98 NSWLR 599 Sydney Seaplanes Pty Ltd v Page [2021] NSWCA 204 SZTAL v Minister for Immigration and Border Protection [2017] HCA 34; (2017) 262 CLR 362 TCL Air Conditioner (Zhongshan) Co Ltd v The Judges of the Federal Court of Australia [2013] HCA 5; (2013) 251 CLR 533 Telecomputing PCS Pty Ltd v Bridge Wholesale Acceptance Corporation (1991) 24 NSWLR 513 Travelex Ltd v Commissioner of Taxation (Cth) [2010] HCA 33; (2010) 241 CLR 510 TXU Electricity Ltd v The Office of the Regulator-General [2001] VSC 4; (2001) 3 VR 93 Utopia Financial Services Pty Ltd v Financial Ombudsman Service Ltd [2012] WASC 279 Ziogos v FSS Trustee Corporation as Trustee of the First State Superannuation Scheme [2015] NSWSC 1385
Division:	General Division
Registry:	New South Wales
National Practice Area:	Administrative and Constitutional Law and Human Rights
Number of paragraphs:	147
Date of last submissions:	28 June 2021 (First Respondent/Cross-Claimant) 5 July 2021 (Applicant/Cross-Respondent)
Date of hearing:	17 June 2021
Counsel for the Applicant:	Mr S Robertson with Ms E Esber
Solicitor for the Applicant:	HWL Ebsworth Lawyers
Counsel for the First Respondent:	Mr MW Wise QC with Mr AF Solomon-Bridge
Solicitor for the First Respondent:	Arslan Lawyers
Counsel for the Second Respondent:	The Second Respondent filed a submitting notice
Counsel for the Cross‑Claimant:	Mr MW Wise QC with Mr AF Solomon-Bridge
Solicitor for the Cross‑Claimant:	Arslan Lawyers
Counsel for the Cross‑Respondent:	Mr S Robertson with Ms E Esber
Solicitor for the Cross‑Respondent:	HWL Ebsworth Lawyers

ORDERS

		NSD 747 of 2019
BETWEEN:	METLIFE INSURANCE LIMITED (ACN 004 274 882) Applicant
AND:	AUSTRALIAN FINANCIAL COMPLAINTS AUTHORITY (ACN 620 494 340) First Respondent ; BRIAN RONALD EDGECOMBE Second Respondent
AND BETWEEN:	AUSTRALIAN FINANCIAL COMPLAINTS AUTHORITY (ACN 620 494 340) Cross-Claimant
AND:	METLIFE INSURANCE LIMITED (ACN 004 274 882) Cross-Respondent

order made by:	COLVIN J
DATE OF ORDER:	27 january 2022

THE COURT ORDERS THAT:

1. There be leave to AFCA to amend its cross-claim in terms of its minute of further particulars of cross-claim dated 15 June 2021.

2. As to the question whether in the events which have occurred and on the proper construction of the relevant statutory provisions and the AFCA Rules, the first respondent had jurisdiction or authority to make a determination in respect of the complaints 600361 and 507677 each dated 12 April 2019, the first respondent had authority to make the determinations.

3. The application be dismissed.

4. The cross-claim be allowed.

5. On or before 10 February 2022, each party do provide a minute of any further orders sought by the party in the proceedings.

6. There be a case management...