McDonald v State of South Australia; McDonald v Minister for Education and Child Development

The applicants, the McDonalds, appealed to the Full Court of the Supreme Court of South Australia against a decision of Nicholson J. The dispute concerned the McDonalds' claims against the State of South Australia and the Minister for Education and Child Development.

The primary legal issue before the Full Court was whether the McDonalds had identified any reasonably arguable grounds of appeal against the decision of Nicholson J. The Court was required to consider the notice of appeal and the summary of argument filed by the applicants to determine if any error of law or fact had been demonstrated.

The Full Court reasoned that the notice of appeal and the supporting submissions were largely repetitive of earlier interlocutory applications and contained general allegations of liability in contract and tort, rather than specific grounds of appeal. The Court found that neither document identified any valid grounds of appeal, nor did the material provided reveal any new matters or errors in Nicholson J's approach. The Court concluded that the reasons for refusing the orders sought by the McDonalds were uncontroversial and supported by authority, and that no reasonably arguable ground of appeal was identified or was apparent. Consequently, the Full Court refused the applications for permission to appeal, finding no injustice to the applicants.