Harris v Caladine

The applicant, the Attorney-General, sought special leave to appeal to the High Court of Australia against a decision concerning the validity of a delegation of power to a registrar. The respondent was represented by Mr. S. Mitchell. The application for special leave was not opposed by the respondent.

The primary legal issue before the High Court was the validity of the delegation of power to a registrar, and whether the decision in *Reg v Davison* remained good law in light of subsequent dicta, or if it should be confined to the specific status of bankruptcy registrars. A secondary issue, arising only if the first ground failed, concerned the nature of an appeal from a registrar to the court when a consent order was no longer supported by consent due to alleged vitiation.

The Chief Justice, Mason CJ, indicated that special leave would be granted, noting the importance of the point raised. Mr. Bennett, QC, for the applicant, disclosed a potential issue regarding Order 24 rule (1)(viii) of the Rules of the High Court, which prohibits evidence of anything occurring before a registrar, and how this might affect an application for review where the registrar's conduct is in question. However, this disclosure was not seen as a reason to refuse special leave. Toohey J inquired about the grounds of appeal, and Mr. Bennett indicated they could be compressed into two main issues: the validity of the delegation of power and the scope of judicial power, and the content of an appeal from a registrar.

Special leave to appeal was granted by the High Court.