Dudzinski v Centrelink

[2003] FCA 308

FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

Dudzinski v Centrelink [2003] FCA 308

PRACTICE & PROCEDURE – whether O 35 r 7 can be used as an alternative to the appeal process – whether application brought before a judge by a party who has been unsuccessful before that judge on a previous occasion provides a basis for complaint of apprehended or actual bias – whether an interlocutory order for the payment of money can be made prior to determining where there is any entitlement to the payment

Judiciary Act 1903 (Cth) s 39
Federal Court of Australia Act 1976 (Cth) s 24
Federal Court Rules, O 52

Ebner v Official Trustee in Bankruptcy (2000) 205 CLR 337 followed
Décor Corp Pty Ltd v Data Industries (1991) 33 FCR 397 referred to
Adam P. Brown Male Fashions Pty Ltd v Phillip Morris Inc (1981) 148 CLR 170 referred to
Dyson Appliances Ltd v Hoover Ltd (No 4) (Chancery Division, Mr Justice Laddie 18 February 2003 unreported) approved

WALDEMAR DUDZINSKI and ANNA DUDZINSKI v CENTRELINK and JUDY O’SHEA and JOHN CURCURRUTO

No Q 15 of 2003

SPENDER J
BRISBANE
4 APRIL 2003

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
QUEENSLAND DISTRICT REGISTRY	No Q 15 OF 2003

BETWEEN:

WALDEMAR DUDZINSKI
FIRST APPLICANT

ANNA DUDZINSKI
SECOND APPLICANT

AND:

CENTRELINK
FIRST RESPONDENT

JUDY O'SHEA
SECOND RESPONDENT

JOHN CURCURRUTO
THIRD RESPONDENT

JUDGE:

SPENDER J

DATE OF ORDER:

4 APRIL 2003

WHERE MADE:

BRISBANE

THE COURT ORDERS THAT:

1.The notice of motion dated 2 April 2003 seeking an extension of time within which to appeal is declined, and leave to appeal the interlocutory order of 28 February 2003 is refused.

2.The applicant is to pay the respondents’ costs, to be taxed if not agreed.

Note:    Settlement and entry of orders is dealt with in Order 36 of the Federal Court Rules.

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
QUEENSLAND DISTRICT REGISTRY	No Q 15 OF 2003

BETWEEN:

WALDEMAR DUDZINSKI
FIRST APPLICANT

ANNA DUDZINSKI
SECOND APPLICANT

AND:

CENTRELINK
FIRST RESPONDENT

JUDY O'SHEA
SECOND RESPONDENT

JOHN CURCURRUTO
THIRD RESPONDENT

JUDGE:	SPENDER J
DATE:	4 APRIL 2003
PLACE:	BRISBANE

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT

1. The second applicant, Anna Dudzinski, has made an application that I disqualify myself from hearing this notice of motion on the grounds of either actual bias or apprehended bias.  I have, in the course of the Dudzinskis’ litigation, had to make a number of decisions in respect of various applications brought both by Waldemar Dudzinski and against him, and concerning also applications by Anna Dudzinski.  In respect of a number of those, my determination has been made the subject of appeal to the Full Court and, in at least one instance, from the judgment of the Full Court to the High Court. 

2. The present notice of motion concerns an application for extension of time within which to seek leave to appeal from my declining to grant interlocutory relief pending an application by, relevantly, Anna Dudzinski, seeking to challenge a decision by Centrelink to refuse the payment of allowances in October of last…