CAMPBELL v Federal Circuit Court of Australia

[2015] FCCA 1549

FEDERAL CIRCUIT COURT OF AUSTRALIA

CAMPBELL & ANOR v FEDERAL CIRCUIT COURT OF AUSTRALIA [2015] FCCA 1549

Catchwords:
ADMINISTRATIVE LAW – No jurisdiction. 

PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – Summary dismissal – application summarily dismissed.

Legislation: 
Federal Circuit Court Act 1999, ss.17A, 88F
Federal Circuit Court Rules 2001, r.13.10

Spencer v the Commonwealth of Australia (2010) 241 CLR 118.

First Applicant: PETER CAMPBELL

Second Applicant: HENRY ALEXANDER SMART

Respondent: FEDERAL CIRCUIT COURT OF AUSTRALIA

File Number: SYG 1056 of 2015

Judgment of: Judge Street

Hearing date: 4 June 2015

Date of Last Submission: 4 June 2015

Delivered at: Sydney

Delivered on: 4 June 2015

REPRESENTATION

Counsel for the Applicant: Mr D. Maralis

Solicitors for the Applicant: Edward Chee

Counsel for the Respondent: Mr P. Melican

Solicitors for the Respondent: Australian Government Solicitor

ORDERS

1. The application be summarily dismissed.

FEDERAL CIRCUIT COURT OF AUSTRALIA

AT SYDNEY

SYG 1056 of 2015

PETER CAMPBELL

First Applicant

HENRY ALEXANDER SMART

Second Applicant

And

FEDERAL CIRCUIT COURT OF AUSTRALIA

Respondent

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT

1. This is an application in respect of which a suppression order is sought under s.88F of the Federal Circuit Court Act 1999 in respect to a judgment delivered by a judge of this Court, published in 2013.  The application has joined the Court as a party to the proceedings.  A representative of the Australian Crime Commission has appeared in relation to the application. 

2. This Court has no power of prerogative relief in respect of another judge of this Court.  The proceedings joining the Court are misconceived.  I am patently satisfied the proceedings have no reasonable prospect of success. 

3. In considering exercise of the Court’s summary jurisdiction under s.17A (Federal Circuit Court Act 1999) and r.13.01 (Federal Circuit Court Rules 2001), I take into account the principles and caution in Spencer v the Commonwealth of Australia (2010) 241 CLR 118, and, in particular, [24]-[25] and [59]-[60].

4. Quite apart from the difficulty of having no jurisdiction to the extent that the proceedings purport to join this Court there is no substance in the matter the subject of the alleged relief in the nature of a suppression order when the matter has been in the public arena for such a long period of time given that it was published in 2013.  That is also a reason why the proceedings are doomed to failure.  The proceedings have no reasonable prospect of success.  The application is summarily dismissed. 

I certify that the preceding four (4) paragraphs are a true copy of the reasons for judgment of Judge Street

Associate: 

Date:  9 June 2015