Conomy, In the matter of an application for leave to issue or file
Case
•
[2018] HCATrans 103
Details
AGLC
Case
Decision Date
Conomy, In the matter of an application for leave to issue or file [2018] HCATrans 103
[2018] HCATrans 103
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The High Court of Australia considered an ex parte application by Jerrod James Conomy for leave to issue or file further documents in a prior proceeding, Matter No P20 of 2016. The applicant sought various orders, including directions regarding the jurisdiction exercised in previous decisions, the reproduction of his applications in any judgment, and dispensation from the effect of a deemed abandonment of his special leave application. The court also considered a subsequent summons filed by the applicant on 24 May 2018, which sought further, related orders.
The central legal issue before the court was whether to grant the applicant leave to file further documents and make the orders sought in his applications. This required the court to determine if there was any prospect of success in the applicant's underlying application for special leave to appeal, which had previously been deemed abandoned due to non-compliance with court rules, and subsequently dismissed by other Justices. The court also had to consider the applicant's repeated attempts to revive his special leave application and his requests for specific procedural directions and judicial recusal.
The court dismissed both the ex parte application and the subsequent summons. The reasoning was that the applicant's application for special leave to appeal had no prospect of success, as confirmed by previous judgments of the Magistrates' Court of Western Australia, the Supreme Court of Western Australia, and the Court of Appeal of Western Australia. The High Court had previously dismissed the applicant's application for special leave due to failure to file his written case, and subsequent attempts to reinstate the matter had also been unsuccessful. The court found it would be futile to allow the applicant to take further steps in the proceeding, as the underlying appeal had no merit. The court also noted that the applicant had previously been directed to seek leave from a Justice before filing any further documents in the proceeding.
The central legal issue before the court was whether to grant the applicant leave to file further documents and make the orders sought in his applications. This required the court to determine if there was any prospect of success in the applicant's underlying application for special leave to appeal, which had previously been deemed abandoned due to non-compliance with court rules, and subsequently dismissed by other Justices. The court also had to consider the applicant's repeated attempts to revive his special leave application and his requests for specific procedural directions and judicial recusal.
The court dismissed both the ex parte application and the subsequent summons. The reasoning was that the applicant's application for special leave to appeal had no prospect of success, as confirmed by previous judgments of the Magistrates' Court of Western Australia, the Supreme Court of Western Australia, and the Court of Appeal of Western Australia. The High Court had previously dismissed the applicant's application for special leave due to failure to file his written case, and subsequent attempts to reinstate the matter had also been unsuccessful. The court found it would be futile to allow the applicant to take further steps in the proceeding, as the underlying appeal had no merit. The court also noted that the applicant had previously been directed to seek leave from a Justice before filing any further documents in the proceeding.
Details
Key Legal Topics
Areas of Law
-
Civil Procedure
-
Insolvency
Legal Concepts
-
Appeal
-
Jurisdiction
-
Procedural Fairness
-
Remedies
-
Standing
-
Stay of Proceedings
Actions
Download as PDF
Download as Word Document
Most Recent Citation
High Court Bulletin [2018] HCAB 8
Cases Cited
2
Statutory Material Cited
0
Conomy v Maden
[2015] WASC 178
Conomy v Maden
[2016] WASCA 31