MHP v DOCS

[2002] HCATrans 396

IN THE HIGH COURT OF AUSTRALIA

Office of the Registry
  Adelaide  No A7 of 2001

B e t w e e n -

ALESSANDRO ZOLLO and IOLANDA ZOLLO

Applicants

and

NATIONAL AUSTRALIA BANK LIMITED

Respondent

Application for special leave to appeal

GUMMOW J
KIRBY J

TRANSCRIPT OF PROCEEDINGS

AT ADELAIDE ON WEDNESDAY, 14 AUGUST 2002, AT 3.27 PM

Copyright in the High Court of Australia

GUMMOW J:   The applicants, Mr and Mrs Zollo, seek special leave to appeal to this Court from a decision of the judge of the Federal Court of Australia, Justice Kiefel. Her Honour was not sitting as the Full Court of the Federal Court. Section 33(2) of the Federal Court of Australia Act 1976, as it applied to the present circumstance, stipulates that no appeal should be brought to this court from a judgment of the Full Court “constituted by a single Judge”.

Accordingly, the application to this Court is incompetent.  Further, it was made out of the time stipulated by Order 69A of the High Court Rules.  An extension of time should be refused because any special leave application would be doomed to fail as incompetent.  We should also add that even if the Court were minded to have extended the time, the application would have enjoyed no prospects of success.  Accordingly, whilst we have considered the written materials, we have come to the conclusion that the extension of time should be refused, and refused with costs.

AT 3.29 PM THE MATTER WAS CONCLUDED