Michos v Eastbrooke Medical Centre Pty Ltd

Case [2020] HCASL 93


MICHOS

v

EASTBROOKE MEDICAL CENTRE PTY LTD

[2020] HCASL 93
M3/2020

  1. An extension of time is required to allow this application for special leave to appeal to proceed. The appeal foreshadowed by this application for special leave to appeal concerns matters of practice and procedure. The application raises no question of principle of general importance. In addition, the appeal has insufficient prospects of success to warrant the grant of special leave. Accordingly, it would be futile to grant the necessary extension of time. The application should be refused.

  2. 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 application.

P.A. Keane J.J. Edelman
16 April 2020
Details
AGLC
Michos v Eastbrooke Medical Centre Pty Ltd [2020] HCASL 93
Case
[2020] HCASL 93
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The case of Michos v Eastbrooke Medical Centre Pty Ltd involves the applicant, Michos, seeking an extension of time to allow the application for special leave to appeal to proceed. The appeal in question pertains to matters of practice and procedure. The primary issue before the court was whether the application for an extension of time should be granted. The court was required to determine whether the application met the criteria for granting special leave to appeal, which includes assessing the principle of general importance and the prospects of success of the appeal.

The court considered the criteria for granting an extension of time and the requirements for special leave to appeal. The court noted that the application for special leave to appeal did not raise any question of principle of general importance. Additionally, the appeal had insufficient prospects of success, making it futile to grant the necessary extension of time. The court concluded that the application should be refused as it did not meet the criteria for special leave to appeal.

The court dismissed the application for an extension of time and ruled that the application for special leave to appeal should not proceed. The decision was based on the assessment of the application's merits and the prospects of success of the appeal. The court found that the application did not meet the criteria for special leave to appeal, and therefore, the application should be refused. The court's decision was final, and no further appeal could be made on the matter.

Orders

Orders of the court

Full text does not contain this section.

Background

Background to the litigation

Full text does not contain this section.

Evidence

Evidence Before The Court

Full text does not contain this section.

Decision

Reasons for decision

Full text does not contain this section.

Ratio Decidendi

Legal Principle Established

Full text does not contain this section.