Davint v Malburon

DAVINT
v
MALBURON
[2016] HCASL 39
M235/2015

The applicant seeks special leave to appeal from orders of the Family Court of Australia (Strickland J) made on 15 September 2015 and 25 September 2015, on appeal from orders of the Federal Circuit Court of Australia (Judge Turner) made on 1 September 2014, upon an application by the respondent for summary dismissal of the applicant's "Further Amended Application Alleging Contravention" of orders made by consent on 15 August 2012.
None of the applicant's proposed grounds of appeal enjoys sufficient prospects of success to warrant the grant of special leave to appeal and, in any event, this matter is not an appropriate vehicle for the consideration of any of the questions of principle to which it is said to give rise.
Pursuant to r 41.11.1 of the High Court Rules 2004 (Cth), we direct the Registrar to draw up, sign and seal an order dismissing the application with costs.

G.A.A. Nettle
6 April 2016 M.M. Gordon

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The case of Davint v Malburon involves the applicant, Davint, seeking special leave to appeal against the orders made by the Family Court of Australia, as well as from the orders of the Federal Circuit Court of Australia. Davint was attempting to appeal against the dismissal of their application for summary dismissal by the respondent, Malburon. The legal issues in the case centered on whether Davint's proposed grounds for appeal had sufficient prospects of success, and whether the case was an appropriate vehicle for considering questions of principle that Davint claimed it raised. The High Court of Australia was tasked with deciding whether to grant special leave to appeal, and if not, whether the matter could still be considered on its merits.

The High Court found that Davint's proposed grounds of appeal did not have sufficient prospects of success to warrant the grant of special leave. The Court held that the case did not present an appropriate opportunity to consider the questions of principle that Davint argued it raised. The reasoning of the Court was that the matter at hand was not suitable for the consideration of broader legal principles, and that the specific circumstances of the case did not warrant an exception to the usual requirements for special leave. Accordingly, the Court concluded that the application for special leave to appeal should be dismissed.

In light of the Court's decision, Davint's application for special leave to appeal was dismissed, and the Registrar was directed to draw up, sign, and seal an order to that effect. The order also included a direction for Davint to pay costs associated with the application. This outcome effectively concluded the legal proceedings between the parties regarding the summary dismissal of Davint's application.

Keep reading for free

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established