GR v Secretary, Department of Family and Community Services and Justice

The case involved an applicant seeking leave to file a notice of motion returnable in the Duty List. The applicant had previously been required by prior orders of the Court to seek leave before making such an application. The applicant had made numerous failed applications for leave and was now seeking leave for a further application, citing the occurrence of the coronavirus pandemic as a reason. The respondent argued that the applicant should have sought leave from the primary judge instead of the Duty List. The matter was heard in the Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia.

The court was required to decide whether the applicant was required to seek leave from the primary judge before making the application to the Duty List, and if so, whether the occurrence of the coronavirus pandemic was a sufficient reason to depart from the prior orders of the Court. The court also had to consider the appropriate course of action when an applicant has made numerous failed applications for leave.

The court found that the applicant was required to seek leave from the primary judge before making the application to the Duty List. However, the court also found that the occurrence of the coronavirus pandemic was a sufficient reason to depart from the prior orders of the Court. The court noted that the pandemic had caused significant disruptions to the court system, and that it was reasonable for the applicant to seek to make the application during this time. The court further found that the appropriate course of action was for the primary judge to consider the application and determine whether leave should be granted.

The court granted leave to the applicant to file the notice of motion returnable in the Duty List. The court also made orders for the primary judge to consider the application and determine whether leave should be granted.