JESS
v
GARVEY
[2018] HCASL 202
B13/2018
This application for special leave to appeal from the decision of the Full Court of the Family Court of Australia (Thackray, Strickland and Murphy JJ) would not enjoy sufficient prospects of success to warrant a grant of special leave to appeal. The application should be dismissed.
Pursuant to r 41.08.1 of the High Court Rules 2004 (Cth), we direct the Registrar to draw up, sign and seal an order dismissing the application with costs.
M.M. Gordon
8 August 2018J.J. Edelman
Details
- AGLC
- Jess v Garvey [2018] HCASL 202
- Case
- [2018] HCASL 202
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The case of Jess v Garvey was an application for special leave to appeal from a decision of the Family Court of Australia's Full Court. The original dispute involved issues of family law, including child custody and access, as well as property settlement. The Full Court had ruled in favour of the respondent, Garvey, and the applicant, Jess, sought special leave to appeal to the High Court.
The legal issues before the court were whether the Full Court had erred in law or made an error of fact that would warrant a grant of special leave to appeal. The court needed to assess the merits of the appeal and determine whether the case presented sufficient prospects of success.
In considering the matter, the court found that the appeal did not have sufficient prospects of success to warrant a grant of special leave. The court held that the Full Court had not erred in law or made an error of fact that would justify the grant of special leave. The appeal did not present a novel or significant legal issue that would warrant the court's intervention.
As such, the court dismissed the application for special leave to appeal and directed the Registrar to draw up, sign, and seal an order dismissing the application with costs. This outcome indicates that the court was satisfied with the Full Court's decision and found no grounds for further appeal.
The legal issues before the court were whether the Full Court had erred in law or made an error of fact that would warrant a grant of special leave to appeal. The court needed to assess the merits of the appeal and determine whether the case presented sufficient prospects of success.
In considering the matter, the court found that the appeal did not have sufficient prospects of success to warrant a grant of special leave. The court held that the Full Court had not erred in law or made an error of fact that would justify the grant of special leave. The appeal did not present a novel or significant legal issue that would warrant the court's intervention.
As such, the court dismissed the application for special leave to appeal and directed the Registrar to draw up, sign, and seal an order dismissing the application with costs. This outcome indicates that the court was satisfied with the Full Court's decision and found no grounds for further appeal.
Orders
Orders of the court
Full text does not contain this section.
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
Full text does not contain this section.
Ratio Decidendi
Legal Principle Established
Full text does not contain this section.