The applicant filed a summons dated 26 October 2018 seeking leave to file a Proposed Amended Application for Special Leave to Appeal from the judgment of the Full Court of the Federal Court of Australia of 29 June 2018 (Logan and Mortimer JJ, Charlesworth J dissenting in part) dismissing an appeal against a sequestration order made by a judge of the Federal Circuit Court of Australia on 4 April 2017 over the applicant’s estate. Leave to file the Proposed Amended Application for Special Leave to Appeal is granted.
Ground 1 of that amended application identified special leave questions which asserted the constitutional invalidity of s 103(1) of the Federal Circuit Court of Australia Act 1999 (Cth) and r 2.02(1) of the Federal Circuit Court (Bankruptcy) Rules 2016 (Cth) and further contended that the power conferred by s 52(5) of the Bankruptcy Act 1966 (Cth) could be exercised only by a judge of the Federal Circuit Court or the Federal Court, not by a registrar of either court. Those questions were raised for the first time in the amended application, are contrary to authority and would enjoy no prospect of success. Special leave to appeal on this ground should be refused.
Ground 1 of the amended application included a further complaint that the exercise of power by the Registrar of the Federal Circuit Court under s 52(5) of the Bankruptcy Act 1966 (Cth) and r 16.05(2)(e) of the Federal Circuit Court Rules 2001 (Cth) ("the slip rule") was beyond power. The history of the application, including the manner in which the parties conducted the litigation, makes this application not an appropriate vehicle to consider the slip rule and it is not otherwise in the interests of the proper administration of justice for leave to be granted. Special leave to appeal on this ground should be refused.
Ground 2 of the amended application sought to raise an unparticularised complaint about a denial of natural justice which would enjoy no prospect of success. Special leave to appeal on this ground should be refused.
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 amended application.
G.A.A Nettle 13 February 2019
M.M Gordon
Details
AGLC
Luck v University of Southern Queensland [2019] HCASL 20
Case
[2019] HCASL 20
Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
In the case of Luck v University of Southern Queensland, the applicant sought leave to file a proposed amended application for special leave to appeal against a judgment made by the Full Court of the Federal Court of Australia, which dismissed an appeal against a sequestration order made by a judge of the Federal Circuit Court of Australia over the applicant's estate. The applicant sought to challenge the constitutional validity of certain sections of the Federal Circuit Court of Australia Act 1999 and the Federal Circuit Court (Bankruptcy) Rules 2016, as well as the power conferred by s 52(5) of the Bankruptcy Act 1966. Additionally, the applicant sought to raise a complaint about a denial of natural justice. The Full Court of the Federal Court of Australia had dismissed the appeal and the applicant sought special leave to appeal to the High Court of Australia.
The legal issues before the High Court were whether the applicant had grounds for special leave to appeal and whether it was in the interests of the proper administration of justice to grant leave. The High Court considered the grounds for appeal and found that the applicant's arguments were contrary to authority and would not enjoy a prospect of success. The High Court also found that the application was not an appropriate vehicle to consider the slip rule and that it was not in the interests of the proper administration of justice to grant leave.
The High Court granted leave to file the proposed amended application for special leave to appeal, but found that the applicant's arguments were contrary to authority and would not enjoy a prospect of success. The High Court also found that the application was not an appropriate vehicle to consider the slip rule and that it was not in the interests of the proper administration of justice to grant leave. The High Court directed the Registrar to draw up, sign and seal an order dismissing the amended application.
The final orders of the High Court were that leave to file the proposed amended application for special leave to appeal was granted, but the applicant's arguments were found to be contrary to authority and would not enjoy a prospect of success. The High Court also found that the application was not an appropriate vehicle to consider the slip rule and that it was not in the interests of the proper administration of justice to grant leave. The amended application was dismissed.