Markisic v Commonwealth of Australia

The applicants, Markisic and others, sought leave to appeal a decision of the Federal Court of Australia concerning their claims against the Commonwealth of Australia. The dispute involved allegations of breaches of contract and misrepresentation.

The primary legal issue before the Court of Appeal was whether the primary judge erred in dismissing the applicants' claims. This required the court to consider the sufficiency of the evidence presented by the applicants and the proper application of contractual principles and the law of misrepresentation to the facts.

The Court of Appeal, comprising Beazley and Young JJA, dismissed the summons for leave to appeal. The court found no arguable error in the primary judge's decision, implicitly concluding that the applicants had failed to establish a sufficient basis for their claims or to demonstrate that the primary judge had made an error of law or fact. Consequently, the applicants were ordered to pay the respondent's costs of the summons for leave to appeal.