Little v Registrar of the High Court of Australia

The case of Little v Registrar of the High Court of Australia presented before the High Court of Australia. The appellant, Mr. Little, sought to challenge the decision of the Registrar to refuse his application to appear in a case before the High Court. Mr. Little, an admitted practitioner, was not currently in possession of a practising certificate. Despite this, he sought to argue that he was entitled to practise before the High Court and be added to the Register of Practitioners. The central issue before the Court was whether the Registrar's refusal to allow Mr. Little to practise before the High Court was an exercise of a discretion or a duty.

The Court held that the Registrar’s decision was not a discretionary act but rather an exercise of a duty, given that Mr. Little had been struck off the Register of Practitioners. The Court found that under the relevant provisions of the Acts Interpretation Act 1901 (Cth), the Registrar was under a mandatory obligation to refuse any application to practise if the applicant was not on the Register of Practitioners. Consequently, the Registrar's decision was not open to review on the grounds of whether it was a discretionary or non-discretionary act. The Court held that the Registrar was acting pursuant to a statutory duty when declining Mr. Little’s application.

The appeal was dismissed, and Mr. Little was ordered to pay the respondent's costs of the appeal, which are to be taxed. The Court's decision underscores the importance of adhering to statutory requirements when applying to practise before the High Court and highlights the limited scope of judicial review in such matters.