Mentink v Registrar of the Australian Register of Ships (No 2)

In the case of Mentink v Registrar of the Australian Register of Ships (No 2), the applicant, Mentink, was the registered owner of the ship Larus II until 11 August 2004. The dispute arose when the respondent, the Registrar of the Australian Register of Ships, closed the registration of Larus II on the Register, relying on a bill of sale provided by a third party. Mentink denied the validity of the bill of sale and contended that the Registrar did not have the authority to close the registration without proper notification from the registered owner. The Supreme Court of Queensland was tasked with determining whether the Registrar's actions were lawful and whether declaratory relief should be granted to Mentink.

The primary legal issues for the court to decide were whether the Supreme Court had jurisdiction to make the declarations sought by Mentink, and if the Registrar's actions constituted a "decision" or "reviewable conduct" under the Administrative Decisions (Judicial Review) Act 1977 (Cth). Additionally, the court had to assess whether the declarations sought by Mentink were appropriate and not futile. The Registrar argued that the court lacked jurisdiction due to section 9 of the Administrative Decisions (Judicial Review) Act 1977 (Cth), and that the Registrar's entry on the Register did not amount to a reviewable decision or conduct. Furthermore, the Registrar contended that the declarations sought by Mentink were too broad and would serve no practical purpose.

The court determined that the Registrar did not have the authority to close the registration of Larus II based on a bill of sale from a third party without receiving proper notification from the registered owner. The court held that the Registrar's entry on the Register did not constitute a "decision" or "reviewable conduct" under the Administrative Decisions (Judicial Review) Act 1977 (Cth). Consequently, the court held that the Supreme Court had jurisdiction to make the declaration sought by Mentink. However, the court found that the declaration should be limited to the specific circumstances of the case and refused to make the other declarations sought by Mentink as they were too broad and would serve no practical purpose.

The court made the following orders: first, it declared that the Registrar was not authorized by section 66 of the Shipping Registration Act 1981 (Cth) to make an entry in the Register resulting in the closure of the registration of Larus II, given that the notice was provided by a third party rather than the registered owner. Second, the court refused the other actions for declaratory relief. Lastly, the court made no order as to costs.