FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
Lin v State Rail Authority of New South Wales [2003] FCA 1324
SARAH LIN v STATE RAIL AUTHORITY OF NEW SOUTH WALES
N 1728 OF 2003
MOORE J
SYDNEY
11 NOVEMBER 2003
IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
NEW SOUTH WALES DISTRICT REGISTRY
N 1728 OF 2003
ON APPEAL FROM AN INTERLOCUTORY DECISION OF A SINGLE JUDGE OF THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
BETWEEN:
SARAH LIN
APPELLANTAND:
STATE RAIL AUTHORITY OF NEW SOUTH WALES
RESPONDENTJUDGE:
MOORE J
DATE OF ORDER:
11 NOVEMBER 2003
WHERE MADE:
SYDNEY
THE COURT ORDERS THAT:
1.The application for leave to appeal be dismissed.
2.The appellant pay the costs of the respondent.
Note: Settlement and entry of orders is dealt with in Order 36 of the Federal Court Rules
IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
NEW SOUTH WALES DISTRICT REGISTRY
N 1728 OF 2003
ON APPEAL FROM AN INTERLOCUTORY DECISION OF A SINGLE JUDGE OF THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
BETWEEN:
SARAH LIN
APPELLANTAND:
STATE RAIL AUTHORITY OF NEW SOUTH WALES
RESPONDENTJUDGES:
MOORE J
DATE OF ORDER:
11 NOVEMBER 2003
WHERE MADE:
SYDNEY
REASONS FOR JUDGMENT
This is what purports to be an application by Ms Sarah Lin for leave to appeal against a judgment, decision or direction of Wilcox J of 30 October 2003, fixing for hearing a notice of motion filed on 29 October 2003 by the respondent to the proceedings, the State Rail Authority of New South Wales. In that notice of motion, the State Rail Authority of New South Wales seeks orders dismissing the principal application by Ms Lin on the basis that it is frivolous or vexatious.
Assuming that the application for leave to appeal is competent, nothing has been demonstrated in my view to suggest that any error attended the decision of Wilcox J to fix the motion of the State Rail Authority for hearing. Accordingly, I propose to dismiss the application for leave to appeal with costs.
I certify that the preceding two (2) numbered paragraphs are a true copy of the Reasons for Judgment herein of the Honourable Justice Moore.
Associate:
Dated: 2 December 2003
The appellant appeared in person. Counsel for the Respondent: A P Coleman Solicitor for the Respondent: Henry Davis York Date of Hearing: 11 November 2003 Date of Judgment: 11 November 2003
- AGLC
- Lin v State Rail Authority of New South Wales [2003] FCA 1324
- Case
- [2003] FCA 1324
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The court considered whether the appeal had a reasonable chance of success, as required by statute. It noted the District Court's detailed findings regarding the cause of the accident and the contributory negligence of Mr. Lin. The Supreme Court found that the District Court had correctly applied the law and that the evidence supported its findings. It held that there was no reasonable chance that an appeal would succeed, and therefore dismissed the application for leave to appeal.
Consequently, the Supreme Court ordered that the application for leave to appeal be dismissed and that the appellant pay the costs of the respondent. The reasoning of the District Court was upheld, and the appellant was held responsible for the costs incurred in the Supreme Court proceedings. This decision reinforces the principle that appeals should only be granted where there is a substantial question of law or significant error of fact or law.
Orders
Orders of the court
1. The application for leave to appeal be dismissed.
2. The appellant pay the costs of the respondent.
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
Established by: MOORE J
Full text does not contain this section.