Lin v Rail Corporation New South Wales

Lin v Rail Corporation New South Wales involved the applicant's appeal against the dismissal of her claims in proceedings brought in 2010 and 2003. The applicant sought leave to appeal against the dismissal of her claims by Rares J, arguing various grounds, including that the statutory limitation periods did not apply and that the application of these periods would contravene the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. The Federal Court was required to determine whether any of the grounds provided a sufficient basis for granting leave to appeal.

The court found that the applicant's arguments were without merit. It held that the statutory limitation periods were properly applied and that the Universal Declaration of Human Rights did not provide a basis for overriding domestic legislation. The court further noted that the applicant's reliance on Order 20 r 6 of the Federal Court Rules was misplaced, as the notice of motion filed in the 2003 proceedings had been rendered ineffective by the dismissal of the appeal. The court concluded that there was no prospect of the appeal succeeding if leave was granted.

Given the lack of merit in the applicant's arguments, the application for leave to appeal was dismissed with costs. The court held that despite the applicant being unrepresented, there was no reason to deviate from the ordinary rule regarding costs.

The court's decision was clear in dismissing the application for leave to appeal, underscoring the strength of the grounds on which the original dismissal was made. The applicant's arguments were found to be without substance, and the application was dismissed with costs.