Biritz v National Australia Bank Ltd

[2002] FCAFC 180

FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

Biritz v National Australia Bank Ltd [2002] FCAFC 180

ERIKA BIRITZ v NATIONAL AUSTRALIA BANK LTD
V 1271 of 2001

GRAY, HEEREY AND SUNDBERG JJ
2 MAY 2002
MELBOURNE

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
VICTORIA DISTRICT REGISTRY	V 1271 of 2001

BETWEEN:	ERIKA BIRITZ APPLICANT
AND:	NATIONAL AUSTRALIA BANK LTD RESPONDENT
JUDGES:	GRAY, HEEREY AND SUNDBERG JJ
DATE OF ORDER:	2 MAY 2002
WHERE MADE:	MELBOURNE

THE COURT ORDERS THAT:

1.Leave to appeal from the interlocutory judgment of Finkelstein J given on 12 April 2002 be refused.

2.        The notice of motion filed on 18 April 2002 be dismissed.

3.        The applicant pay the respondent’s costs of the notice of motion.

Note:    Settlement and entry of orders is dealt with in Order 36 of the Federal Court Rules.

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
VICTORIA DISTRICT REGISTRY	V 1271 of 2001

BETWEEN:	ERIKA BIRITZ APPLICANT
AND:	NATIONAL AUSTRALIA BANK LTD RESPONDENT

JUDGES:	GRAY, HEEREY AND SUNDBERG JJ
DATE:	2 MAY 2002
PLACE:	MELBOURNE

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT

THE COURT:

1. The Court is of the view that the appeal for which leave is sought is without any prospect of success and accordingly leave to appeal should be refused.  The applicant for leave has also sought other orders in the notice of motion filed on 18 April 2002.  There have been allegations made, in general terms, of fraud.  They are not properly particularised and there is  no genuine evidence to establish them.  For those reasons, the Court proposes to dismiss the applications for those orders as well.

2. Counsel for the respondent has sought an order for costs fixed on an indemnity basis.  The case does not appear to be a proper case for indemnity costs.

3. The order of the Court will be:

   1.Leave to appeal from the interlocutory judgment of Finkelstein J given on 12 April 2002 be refused.

   2.        The notice of motion filed on 18 April 2002 be dismissed.

   3.        The applicant pay the respondent’s costs of the notice of motion.

I certify that the preceding three (3) numbered paragraphs are a true copy of the Reasons for Judgment herein of the Court.

Associate:

Dated:             7 June 2002

Counsel for the Applicant:	The applicant appeared in person
Counsel for the Respondent:	S Randall
Solicitor for the Respondent:	Russell Kennedy
Date of Hearing:	2 May 2002
Date of Judgment:	2 May 2002