Batterham v Goldberg & Ors

BATTERHAM
v
GOLDBERG & ORS
[2024] HCASL 81
S138/2023

The applicant requires an extension of time within which to seek special leave to appeal from orders of the Court of Appeal of the Supreme Court of New South Wales (White JA and Griffiths A‑JA). The Court of Appeal dismissed the applicant's summons seeking leave to appeal from a decision of the primary judge (Lonergan J), which concluded that the applicant's proceeding was "frivolous and vexatious, disclosed no reasonable cause of action and was an abuse of process" because it sought to re-litigate matters that had already been "comprehensively considered and determined" in the Federal Court of Australia.
There is no reason to doubt the correctness of the decision of the Court of Appeal. An appeal to this Court would enjoy no prospects of success. Accordingly, it would be futile to grant the extension of time that is sought.
Special leave to appeal is refused.
Edelman J
Jagot J
11 April 2024

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In Batterham v Goldberg & Ors, the applicant sought an extension of time to appeal from orders of the Court of Appeal of the Supreme Court of New South Wales, which had dismissed his application for leave to appeal from a decision of the primary judge. The primary judge had ruled that the applicant's proceeding was frivolous and vexatious, and that it sought to re-litigate matters already comprehensively considered in the Federal Court of Australia. The Court of Appeal upheld the primary judge's decision, and the applicant now sought special leave to appeal from those orders to the High Court.

The key legal issues before the Court were whether there were any grounds to doubt the correctness of the Court of Appeal's decision and whether an appeal to the High Court had any prospects of success. The Court considered whether granting the extension of time sought by the applicant would be futile.

The Court found that there was no reason to doubt the correctness of the Court of Appeal's decision, and that an appeal to the High Court would enjoy no prospects of success. The Court noted that the applicant's proceeding had already been comprehensively considered by another court, and that the Court of Appeal had properly exercised its discretion in dismissing the appeal. The Court concluded that granting the extension of time sought would be futile, and therefore refused the application for special leave to appeal.

Keep reading for free

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established