Chandrasekaran, In the matter of an application for leave to issue or file

The applicant, Sujatha Chandrasekaran, sought leave from the High Court of Australia to issue or file an application for special leave to appeal. This application arose from proceedings in the Federal Court of Australia where summary judgment was entered against the applicant in favour of the Commonwealth of Australia, the State of New South Wales, and the Australian Centre for Advanced Computing and Communications Pty Ltd. The applicant’s subsequent application for leave to appeal the summary judgment to the Federal Court was refused by Flick J.

The primary legal issue before the High Court was whether an appeal to the High Court was permissible from the Federal Court's refusal of leave to appeal a summary judgment. This involved interpreting provisions of the *Federal Court of Australia Act 1976* (Cth) concerning appeals from interlocutory judgments and the exercise of the Federal Court's appellate jurisdiction. The court also considered whether any exceptions, such as those provided by s 33(4C) of the Act, applied to permit such an appeal.

The High Court determined that the proposed application for special leave to appeal was incompetent. It reasoned that s 33(4B)(a) of the *Federal Court of Australia Act* expressly prohibits an appeal to the High Court from a judgment of the Federal Court in its appellate jurisdiction, where that judgment is a determination of an application for leave to appeal. The court found that Flick J's refusal of leave to appeal fell within this prohibition. The court rejected the applicant's submission that s 33(4C) created an exception, clarifying that this provision preserves the ability to found an appeal from a final judgment on an interlocutory decision, but does not override the statutory exclusion of High Court appellate jurisdiction in specific circumstances.

Consequently, the application for leave to issue or file the application for special leave to appeal was dismissed.