Superannuation Complaints Tribunal and the public/private distinction in Australian administrative law

This article considers the Superannuation Complaints Tribunal (SCT) and the capacity of its decisions to be reviewed. While the constitutional position of the SCT is settled after the decision of the High Court in Attorney-General (Cth) v Breckler (1999) 197 CLR 83, its categorisation as a private body remains open to question. This being the case, the susceptibility of decisions of the SCT to review is compared with the equitable standards upon which trustee decisions are reviewable. Challenges to decisions of the SCT may not be possible under the Administrative Decisions (Judicial Review) Act 1977 (Cth) but the quasi-private character of the SCT - a private body with a public function - presents scope for courts to hold that the SCT owes an equitable duty to those within its jurisdiction.