Davy v ABS Business Sales Pty Ltd

FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

Davy v ABS Business Sales Pty Ltd [2019] FCA 1466

Appeal from:

Application for extension of time: Davy v ABS Business Sales Pty & Ors [2017] FCCA 2651

File number:

QUD 329 of 2019

Judge:

REEVES J

Date of judgment:

5 September 2019

Catchwords:

PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – application for an extension of time and leave to appeal a decision of the Federal Circuit Court to dismiss the applicant’s application to have his originating application reinstated – where there was a significant delay in bringing the application for an extension of time and leave to appeal – where the applicant did not provide a sufficient reason for the delay – application dismissed

Legislation:

Bankruptcy Act 1966 (Cth)

Federal Court of Australia Act 1976 (Cth)

Federal Court Rules 2011 (Cth)

Cases cited:

EVA17 v Minister for Immigration and Border Protection (2018) 262 FCR 304; [2018] FCAFC 214

Date of hearing:

Determined on the papers

Registry:

Queensland

Division:

Fair Work Division

National Practice Area:

Employment & Industrial Relations

Category:

Catchwords

Number of paragraphs:

12

Counsel for the Applicant:

The Applicant appeared in person

Counsel for the First Respondent:

The First Respondent did not appear

Counsel for the Third Respondent:

The Third Respondent appeared in person

ORDERS

QUD 329 of 2019

BETWEEN:

RONALD DAVY

Applicant

AND:

ABS BUSINESS SALES PTY LTD

First Respondent

PETER BENJAMIN MOLONEY

Second Respondent

KENNETH ALLSOP

Third Respondent

JUDGE:	REEVES J
DATE OF ORDER:	5 SEPTEMBER 2019

THE COURT ORDERS THAT:

1.The application filed 22 May 2019 is dismissed.

Note:   Entry of orders is dealt with in Rule 39.32 of the Federal Court Rules 2011.

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT

REEVES J:

INTRODUCTION

1. This is an application for an extension of time and leave to appeal a decision of the Federal Circuit Court delivered on 31 October 2017 (see Davy v ABS Business Sales Pty & Ors [2017] FCCA 2651 (Davy)). In that decision, the primary judge dismissed an application brought by Mr Davy to reinstate his originating application, which he initially filed on 5 May 2015 and which was dismissed on 16 June 2016.

   FACTUAL BACKGROUND

2. The factual background of this matter was helpfully summarised by the primary judge in Davy at [3]–[10] as follows:

   3.This matter first came before the Court on 29 June, 2015. On that date Judge Vasta made orders directing the parties to file and serve affidavits and referred the matter to a registrar of the Court for mediation.

   4.Neither party appeared for the mediation on 7 August, 2015.

   5.The matter returned for mention before Judge Vasta on 30 October, 2015. Again, orders were made for the parties to file certain material and the matter was fixed for 29 March, 2016 for hearing.

   6.On 16 March, 2016 his Honour vacated the hearing date and made further orders for the filing of material.

   7.The application next came before the Court on 16 June, 2016. On that occasion there was no appearance by the applicant. Judge Vasta ordered:

   That the…