Ferdinands v Allaway, National Duty Registrar (No 1)

[2022] FCA 1599

FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

Ferdinands v Allaway, National Duty Registrar (No 1) [2022] FCA 1599

File number(s):	SAD 117 of 2022
Judgment of:	O'SULLIVAN J
Date of judgment:	2 November 2022
Date of publication of reasons:	20 January 2023
Catchwords:	PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – application for judicial review against a Registrar’s decision to accept documents for filing – interlocutory application seeking leave to file subpoenas to non-parties after reservation of judgment on the judicial review – where the subpoenas are for both the giving of evidence and the production of documents – where the subpoenas are not relevant to a review of the Registrar’s decision to refuse the filing of documents – leave to file and serve subpoenas refused – remaining orders sought are either not within power, and/or are not relevant – request to refer 18 questions of law to the Full Court declined
Legislation:	Federal Court of Australia Act 1976 (Cth)
Division:	General Division
Registry:	South Australia
National Practice Area:	Administrative and Constitutional Law and Human Rights
Number of paragraphs:	9
Date of hearing:	2 November 2022
Counsel for the Applicant:	The Applicant was self-represented
Counsel for the Respondent:	The Respondent filed a Submitting Notice

ORDERS

SAD 117 of 2022

BETWEEN:

TREVOR KINGSLEY FERDINANDS

Applicant

AND:

PHILLIP ALLAWAY NATIONAL DUTY REGISTRAR

Respondent

ORDER MADE BY:	O'SULLIVAN J
DATE OF ORDER:	2 NOVEMBER 2022

THE COURT ORDERS THAT:

1.The applicant’s amended interlocutory application filed on 1 November 2022 is dismissed.

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

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT

O’SULLIVAN J:

1. This is an amended interlocutory application by the applicant, Mr Ferdinands, filed 1 November 2022.  Four matters are raised by Mr Ferdinands this morning.  I will deal with the fourth matter, which involves his referral of questions to the Full Court, at the end of these ex tempore reasons, but the interlocutory application, broadly speaking, seeks three categories of order.

2. Mr Ferdinands has today made comprehensive oral submissions to the Court, for which I am grateful. 

3. As to the first category of order, by orders 1 to 3, Mr Ferdinands seeks orders that he be able to file documents which were forwarded to the Court on 22 September 2022, 24 October 2022 and 31 October 2022, in these proceedings.

4. Mr Ferdinands has already filed comprehensive written submissions in relation to the issue in these proceedings, which is an application for review of the decision of Registrar Allaway to refuse the filing of documents, which the Registrar considered were frivolous, vexatious and an abuse of process.  The decision is still reserved.  I am not prepared to grant leave to file the further documents referred to in orders 1 to 3 of the amended interlocutory application, and I decline to do so. 

5. The second category is in order 4 of the amended interlocutory application.  It seeks leave to file and serve subpoenas on non-parties, which Mr Ferdinands submits are relevant to the question the Court has to decide on the review of Registrar Allaway’s decision.

6. The subpoenas are directed to the Commissioner of the Australian Federal Police; the Director of Military Prosecutions; the Minister for Defence; the Commissioner of Australian Human Rights Commission the Commissioner of Australian Information Commission; and the Attorney-General of the Commonwealth.  The subpoenas are for both the giving of evidence and the production of documents.  In my view, having considered the content of the subpoenas, and indeed, the proposed addressees for the subpoenas, the subpoenas are not relevant to a review of the Registrar’s decision to refuse the filing of documents, and I decline to grant leave to file and serve the subpoenas.

7. The balance of the amended interlocutory application are at proposed orders 5 through to 25.  I have considered those orders carefully, and I have taken into account Mr Ferdinands’ comprehensive submissions.  The orders Mr Ferdinands seeks are either not within power and/or are not relevant in the circumstances of the matter, and/or in the exercise of my discretion, comprise orders or declarations I am not prepared to make.  I decline to make those orders. 

8. The fourth matter, to which I alluded to earlier, was a request by Mr Ferdinands that I refer 18 questions of law to the Full Court.

9. I have considered each of those questions.  None of them relate to the matter to which I am currently considering, which is a review of Registrar Allaway’s decision.  On that basis, I decline to refer the questions of law to the Full Court.

I certify that the preceding nine (9) numbered paragraphs are a true copy of the Reasons for Judgment of the Honourable Justice O'Sullivan.

Associate:

Dated:       20 January 2023