Irwin v Irwin

Case [2016] FCA 1565


FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

Irwin v Irwin [2016] FCA 1565

Appeal from: Irwin v Irwin [2016] FCCA 1767
File number: SAD 202 of 2016
Judge: CHARLESWORTH J
Date of judgment: 7 December 2016
Date of publication of reasons 22 December 2016
Catchwords:

PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE — case management principles — relevance and application of s 37M of the Federal Court of Australia Act 1976 (Cth) to the exercise of discretionary power to dismiss an appeal other than on its merits

PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE — dismissal of appeal for failure by appellant to attend at a hearing relating to the appeal — where appellant’s conduct evidenced a disruptive attitude —where appellant unwilling to discharge obligations under s 37N of the Federal Court of Australia Act 1976 (Cth) – risk of non-attendance on hearing of substantive appeal unacceptable

PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE — appropriate use of email communications between a party to proceedings and an associate of a presiding judge – orders prohibiting email communications with associate

Legislation:

Federal Court of Australia Act 1976 (Cth), ss 25(2B), 37M, 37N

Federal Court Rules 2011 (Cth), rr 9.61, 11.01, 36.01, Div 9.6

Date of hearing: 7 December 2016
Registry: South Australia
Division: General Division
National Practice Area: Commercial and Corporations
Sub-area: General and Personal Insolvency
Category: Catchwords
Number of paragraphs: 64
Counsel for the Appellant: The Appellant did not appear
Counsel for the Respondent: Mr S Ower SC with Mr Selly
Solicitor for the Respondent: Iles Selly Lawyers

ORDERS

SAD 202 of 2016
BETWEEN:

CAMPBELL CREAGHE IRWIN

Appellant

AND:

ANGUS WILLIAM IRWIN

Respondent

JUDGE:

CHARLESWORTH J

DATE OF ORDER:

7 DECEMBER 2016

THE COURT ORDERS THAT:

1.Pursuant to s 37P(3)(f) of the Federal Court of Australia Act 1976 (Cth) the requirements in r 36.74(2) of the Federal Court Rules 2011 (Cth) are waived in relation to the respondent’s application for an order that the appeal be dismissed.

2.The appeal is dismissed.

3.The appellant is to pay the respondent’s costs of and incidental to the appeal.

4.The appellant has leave to inspect, but not to copy, the transcript of today’s hearing in the South Australia District Registry of the Court.

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


REASONS FOR JUDGMENT

Charlesworth J:

INTRODUCTION

  1. Section 25(2B)(bb)(ii) of the Federal Court of Australia Act 1976 (Cth) (Act) confers power upon a single judge to make an order that an appeal to the Court be dismissed for failure of the appellant to attend a hearing relating to the appeal. On 7 December 2016, I dismissed this appeal in the exercise of that power. I delivered brief oral reasons with a view to publishing written reasons at a later time. These are my written reasons.

    SUMMARY OF REASONS

  2. There were two hearings relating to this appeal at which the appellant either did not attend or attended only in part.  The first was a case management hearing on 4 October 2016 during which the appellant departed the Court abruptly at a…

Continue reading Irwin v Irwin

Sign in free to access the full text

Details
AGLC
Irwin v Irwin [2016] FCA 1565
Case
[2016] FCA 1565
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In the matter of Irwin v Irwin, the Federal Court was tasked with deciding whether to dismiss an appeal due to the appellant's non-attendance and disruptive behaviour. The appellant, Irwin, appealed a decision made by the Federal Circuit Court, and the respondent, also Irwin, applied for the appeal to be dismissed for the appellant's failure to attend a hearing and his conduct that evidenced a disruptive attitude. The appellant had also been unwilling to discharge his obligations under section 37N of the Federal Court of Australia Act 1976 (Cth), leading the court to deem the risk of non-attendance on the hearing of the substantive appeal as unacceptable.

The legal issues before the court were the relevance and application of section 37M of the Federal Court of Australia Act 1976 (Cth) to the exercise of discretionary power to dismiss an appeal other than on its merits, and the appropriate use of email communications between a party to proceedings and an associate of a presiding judge. The court had to determine whether the appellant's actions warranted dismissal of the appeal and whether any communication between the appellant and the judge's associate should be permitted.

The court found that the appellant's conduct demonstrated a disruptive attitude and an unwillingness to comply with court obligations, leading to the dismissal of the appeal. The court also determined that the use of email communications between the appellant and the judge's associate was inappropriate and issued orders prohibiting such communications. The court concluded that the appellant's failure to attend the hearing and his conduct warranted the dismissal of the appeal, and that the orders prohibiting email communications were necessary to maintain the integrity of the judicial process.

The court made several orders in relation to the appeal. The requirements in rule 36.74(2) of the Federal Court Rules 2011 (Cth) were waived in relation to the respondent's application for an order that the appeal be dismissed. The appeal was dismissed, and the appellant was ordered to pay the respondent's costs of and incidental to the appeal. The appellant was also granted leave to inspect, but not to copy, the transcript of the hearing. Additionally, orders were made prohibiting email communications between the appellant and the judge's associate.

Orders

Orders of the court

1. Pursuant to s 37P(3)(f) of the Federal Court of Australia Act 1976 (Cth) the requirements in r 36.74(2) of the Federal Court Rules 2011 (Cth) are waived in relation to the respondent’s application for an order that the appeal be dismissed.

2. The appeal is dismissed.

3. The appellant is to pay the respondent’s costs of and incidental to the appeal.

4. The appellant has leave to inspect, but not to copy, the transcript of today’s hearing in the South Australia District Registry of the Court.

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

Background

Background to the litigation

Full text does not contain this section.

Evidence

Evidence Before The Court

Full text does not contain this section.

Decision

Reasons for decision

In accordance with the reminders that have been given to the appellant, I have not taken into account any other email communications from the appellant other than those referred to in these reasons for judgment. To the extent that the appellant’s email of 5 December 2016 complains that his “affidavits and evidence” have been “rejected”, it should be noted that the appellant filed no affidavits in the proceedings and otherwise adduced no evidence except for a printout of an email chain handed up on 4 October 2016 in support of his concerns about Mr Naudi. For completeness, that email has been marked for identification MFI-A3.CONCLUSION For the reasons given above, I made the following orders:1. Pursuant to s 37P(3)(f) of the Federal Court of Australia Act 1976 (Cth) the requirements in r 36.74(2) of the Federal Court Rules 2011 (Cth) are waived in relation to the respondent's application for an order that the appeal be dismissed.2. The appeal is dismissed.3. The appellant is to pay the respondent’s costs of and incidental to the appeal.4. The appellant has leave to inspect, but not to copy, the transcript of today’s hearing in the South Australia District Registry of the Court.

Ratio Decidendi

Legal Principle Established

Full text does not contain this section.