Mitsubishi Motors Australia Ltd v Kowalski

[2018] SASCFC 63

SUPREME COURT OF SOUTH AUSTRALIA

(Full Court: Permission to Appeal in Private)

MITSUBISHI MOTORS AUSTRALIA LTD v KOWALSKI

[2018] SASCFC 63

Reasons for Decision of The Full Court

(The Honourable Justice Vanstone, The Honourable Justice Kelly and The Honourable Justice Bampton)

19 June 2018

APPEAL AND NEW TRIAL - APPEAL - GENERAL PRINCIPLES - RIGHT OF APPEAL

Application for permission to appeal against a decision of a single Judge of the Supreme Court to allow the institution of proceedings.

Held per curiam: the appeal is reasonably arguable. Permission to appeal is granted.

Supreme Court Act 1935 (SA) s 39, referred to.

MITSUBISHI MOTORS AUSTRALIA LTD v KOWALSKI
[2018] SASCFC 63

Full Court:      Vanstone, Kelly and Bampton JJ

1. THE COURT:      The Court has considered in private an application by Mitsubishi Motors Australia Limited for permission to appeal against an order made by a single Judge on 13 February 2018. The order allows Mr Kowalski to lodge an interlocutory application in the South Australia Employment Tribunal, with the aim of applying to set aside an order of the Full Bench of the Workers Compensation Tribunal made in 2002. Mr Kowalski is a person who is subject to an order under s 39 of the Supreme Court Act 1935 (SA) and so the Court’s permission is required to institute proceedings.

2. The application raises important questions as to the test to be applied on an application for permission to institute proceedings.  In addition, it is reasonably arguable that the grant of permission may result in proceedings which are an abuse of process.

3. The Court considers that permission to appeal should be granted and will order accordingly.