Hume v Carey & Ors

HUME
v
CAREY & ORS
[2024] HCASL 176
P16/2024

The applicant requires an extension of time within which to seek special leave to appeal from a judgment of the Court of Appeal of the Supreme Court of Western Australia (Mullins A‑JA, Hall JA and Seaward J agreeing). That judgment dismissed the applicant's appeal against orders made by the Supreme Court of Western Australia (Hill J), which made the termination of the winding up of a company dependent on payment of liquidators' fees by the applicant, as the party who sought the termination order.
The applicant has not identified a principle of general importance sufficient to warrant a grant of special leave to appeal and advances no reasons to doubt the correctness of the decision of the Court of Appeal. An appeal to this Court would enjoy no prospects of success. Accordingly, it would also be futile to grant the extension of time required.
Special leave to appeal is refused.
Edelman J
Jagot J
8 August 2024

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Hume sought an extension of time to appeal against a decision from the Court of Appeal of the Supreme Court of Western Australia, which had dismissed his appeal against orders made by the Supreme Court of Western Australia. These orders made the termination of the winding up of a company conditional on the payment of liquidators' fees by Hume, who had sought the termination order. The High Court was required to determine whether the application for an extension of time to seek special leave to appeal should be granted.

The legal issues at hand involved the principles governing the grant of special leave to appeal in cases of this nature, particularly the requirement for the applicant to demonstrate a principle of general importance or to provide reasons to doubt the correctness of the lower court's decision. Additionally, the Court had to assess whether an appeal to the High Court had any prospects of success or would be futile.

In evaluating the application, the High Court found that Hume had not identified a principle of general importance sufficient to warrant special leave to appeal. Furthermore, he had not provided any reasons to doubt the correctness of the Court of Appeal's decision. Given that an appeal to the High Court would enjoy no prospects of success and would be futile, the Court refused the application for an extension of time. Consequently, special leave to appeal was denied.

In light of the findings, the High Court refused Hume's request for an extension of time to seek special leave to appeal and dismissed the application.

Continue reading Hume v Carey & Ors

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established