Bouffler v State of New South Wales

Case [2017] HCASL 321

BOUFFLER
v
STATE OF NEW SOUTH WALES
[2017] HCASL 321
S220/2017

  1. An extension of time is necessary to allow this application for special leave to appeal to proceed.  The appeal proposed by the application would not enjoy sufficient prospects of success to warrant the grant of special leave to appeal.  In any event, the interests of the due administration of justice do not favour further litigation of this matter.  The application should be dismissed. 

  2. It would be futile to grant the extension of time sought by the applicant; and so the extension should not be granted.

  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 for special leave with costs.

S.J. Gageler
13 December 2017 		P.A. Keane
Details
AGLC
Bouffler v State of New South Wales [2017] HCASL 321
Case
[2017] HCASL 321
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The case of Bouffler v State of New South Wales involved the applicant seeking an extension of time to proceed with an application for special leave to appeal. The matter was before the High Court of Australia, with the application being dismissed. The primary issue before the Court was whether an extension of time should be granted to the applicant to allow the application for special leave to appeal to proceed, and whether the application for special leave itself should be granted.

The Court considered the prospects of success of the proposed appeal, as well as the interests of justice. The Court held that the appeal did not have sufficient prospects of success to warrant the grant of special leave to appeal, and that the interests of justice did not favour further litigation of the matter. The Court found that it would be futile to grant the extension of time sought by the applicant.

As a result of the Court's decision, the application for special leave to appeal was dismissed, and an order was made pursuant to rule 41.08.1 of the High Court Rules 2004 (Cth) that the Registrar draw up, sign and seal an order dismissing the application for special leave with costs. The Court did not grant the extension of time sought by the applicant, as it found that to do so would be futile.

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.