Equity Access Ltd v Westpac Banking Corporation
Case
•
[1989] FCA 361
•9 Jun 1989
Details
AGLC
Case
Decision Date
Equity Access Ltd v Westpac Banking Corporation [1989] FCA 361
[1989] FCA 361
9 Jun 1989
CaseChat Overview and Summary
In the Federal Court of Australia, the case of Equity Access Ltd v Westpac Banking Corporation, NO. G 3 of 1989, was heard before Lockhart J. The dispute arose from the refusal of a temporary entry permit and the decision not to grant entry or resident status to the applicant, Shahin Tahmasebi, by the Minister for Immigration, Local Government and Ethnic Affairs. The case, initially set for hearing, became academic as the Minister, through his delegate, granted the applicant a temporary entry permit allowing a twelve-month stay in Australia, with permission to engage in employment and release from detention.
The primary legal issue before the court was the determination of costs for the proceedings. Given the academic nature of the case due to the supervening decision by the Minister, the court had to assess the likely outcome of the trial, which was complicated by the settled nature of the matter. The court considered submissions from both parties but found it challenging to determine whether the applicant would have succeeded in his application with certainty.
Lockhart J concluded that it was not possible to determine with confidence whether the applicant would have succeeded or failed in his application. Consequently, the court decided not to order costs for either party, as it could not ascertain the likely result of the trial. The court certified the judgment, which was made on 9 June 1989, and vacated the special fixture for the hearing.
The primary legal issue before the court was the determination of costs for the proceedings. Given the academic nature of the case due to the supervening decision by the Minister, the court had to assess the likely outcome of the trial, which was complicated by the settled nature of the matter. The court considered submissions from both parties but found it challenging to determine whether the applicant would have succeeded in his application with certainty.
Lockhart J concluded that it was not possible to determine with confidence whether the applicant would have succeeded or failed in his application. Consequently, the court decided not to order costs for either party, as it could not ascertain the likely result of the trial. The court certified the judgment, which was made on 9 June 1989, and vacated the special fixture for the hearing.
Details
Key Legal Topics
Areas of Law
-
Immigration & Refugee Law
Legal Concepts
-
Jurisdiction
-
Costs
-
Refusal of Entry Permit
Actions
Download as PDF
Download as Word Document
Most Recent Citation
Finnegan v Kemner (No 2) [2025] FCA 1164
Cases Citing This Decision
532
PS Chellaram & Co Ltd v China Ocean Shipping Co
[1991] HCA 36
Davey v Herbst (No 2)
[2012] ACTCA 19
Cases Cited
0
Statutory Material Cited
0