Beckert v Beckert

Case [2022] HCASL 84

BECKERT

v
BECKERT
[2022] HCASL 84
M78/2021

  1. The applicant requires an extension of time within which to file an application for special leave to appeal from a decision of the Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia (Division 1) Appellate Jurisdiction (Strickland, Aldridge and Watts JJ).

  2. There is no reason to doubt the correctness of the Court's decision. The application should be refused. Accordingly, it would be futile to grant the extension of time that is sought.

  3. Pursuant to r 41.08.1 of the High Court Rules 2004 (Cth), we direct the Registrar to draw up, sign and seal an order dismissing the application with costs.

S.J. Gageler S.H.P. Steward
20 April 2022
Details
AGLC
Beckert v Beckert [2022] HCASL 84
Case
[2022] HCASL 84
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In the case of Beckert v Beckert, the applicant sought an extension of time to file an application for special leave to appeal from a decision of the Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia. The decision in question was made by the Appellate Jurisdiction, comprising of Justices Strickland, Aldridge, and Watts. The applicant's request for an extension of time was challenged by the respondent, who argued that there was no sufficient reason to grant the extension, and that the application should be dismissed.

The legal issue before the court was whether the applicant's application for an extension of time should be granted. The court considered the grounds upon which the application for an extension of time was made, the merits of the case, and the likelihood of success of the application for special leave to appeal. The court also considered the principle of finality, which states that a party should not be allowed to relitigate issues that have already been decided by a court of competent jurisdiction.

The court found that there was no sufficient reason to grant the extension of time sought by the applicant. The court noted that there was no doubt as to the correctness of the decision of the Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia, and that the application for special leave to appeal was unlikely to succeed. The court also noted that granting the extension of time would be futile, as it would not serve the interests of justice. Therefore, the court dismissed the application with costs.

In summary, the court found that the application for an extension of time should be refused, as there was no sufficient reason to grant the extension, and the application for special leave to appeal was unlikely to succeed. The court also noted that granting the extension of time would be futile, as it would not serve the interests of justice.

Orders

Orders of the court

Full text does not contain this section.

Background

Background to the litigation

Full text does not contain this section.

Evidence

Evidence Before The Court

Full text does not contain this section.

Decision

Reasons for decision

Full text does not contain this section.

Ratio Decidendi

Legal Principle Established

Full text does not contain this section.