Nyoni v Murphy (No 2)

Case [2017] FCA 1479


FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

Nyoni v Murphy (No 2) [2017] FCA 1479

File number(s): WAD 193 of 2017
Judge(s): SIOPIS J
Date of judgment: 8 December 2017
Catchwords: PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – a Registrar refused under r 2.26 of the Federal Court Rules 2011 (Cth) to accept the applicant’s application for filing – whether the Federal Court has power pursuant to s 35A(5) of the Federal Court of Australia Act 1976 (Cth) to review a decision of a Registrar under r 2.26 not to accept a document for filing.
Legislation:

Federal Court of Australia Act 1976 (Cth) s 35A(5)

Administrative Decisions (Judicial Review) Act 1977 (Cth) s 5

Federal Court Rules 2011 (Cth) rr 2.26, 39.05

Federal Court Rules 1979 (Cth) O 46 r 7A(1)  

Cases cited:

Druett v Segal [2011] FCA 1191

Reaper v Luxton [2015] FCA 430

Haque v Tesoriero [2017] FCA 86

Satchithanantham v National Australia Bank Ltd (2010) 268 ALR 222

Manolakis v District Registrar, South Australia District Registry, Federal Court of Australia (2008) 170 FCR 426

Date of hearing: 29 November 2017
Registry: Western Australia
Division: General Division
National Practice Area: Commercial and Corporations
Sub-area: General and Personal Insolvency
Category: Catchwords
Number of paragraphs: 26
Counsel for the Applicant: The Applicant appeared in person.
Counsel for the First, Second and Third Respondents: Mr C Beetham
Solicitor for the First, Second and Third Respondents: State Solicitor’s Office

ORDERS

WAD 193 of 2017
BETWEEN:

EMSON NYONI

Applicant

AND:

JILLIAN MURPHY

First Respondent

THERESA BEECH

Second Respondent

CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER OF THE DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH WA

Third Respondent

JUDGE:

SIOPIS J

DATE OF ORDER:

8 DECEMBER 2017

THE COURT ORDERS THAT:

1.The applicant’s application of 14 September 2017 for review of the decision of a Registrar of this Court made on 24 August 2017 not to accept the applicant’s application and affidavit both dated 24 August 2017 for filing, is dismissed.

2.The applicant is to pay the respondents’ costs.

Note:    Entry of orders is dealt with in Rule 39.32 of the Federal Court Rules 2011.


REASONS FOR JUDGMENT

SIOPIS J:

  1. This is an application by Mr Nyoni, the applicant, for review of a decision of a Registrar of this Court made on 24 August 2017 to reject Mr Nyoni’s interlocutory application and supporting affidavit both dated 24 August 2017 for filing. Mr Nyoni’s application for review relies upon the power of a Court under s 35A(5) of the Federal Court of Australia Act 1976 (Cth) (the Federal Court Act) to review a decision of a Registrar.

  2. By way of background, Mr Nyoni and the respondents have been involved in litigation against each other on a number of occasions since 2010.  In 2015, the respondents caused a bankruptcy notice to issue to Mr Nyoni, which was founded on costs orders made in the respondents’ favour in 2013 and 2014 totalling in excess of $80,000.  On 17 February 2017, a judge of the Federal Circuit Court of Australia made a sequestration order against the estate of Mr Nyoni based…

Continue reading Nyoni v Murphy (No 2)

Sign in free to access the full text

Details
AGLC
Nyoni v Murphy (No 2) [2017] FCA 1479
Case
[2017] FCA 1479
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The case of Nyoni v Murphy (No 2) involved the applicant, Mr Nyoni, challenging a decision by a Registrar of the Federal Court to refuse his application for filing. The matter was brought before the Court under rule 2.26 of the Federal Court Rules 2011 (Cth), which empowers a Registrar to decline to accept a document for filing if it is deemed frivolous or vexatious. The applicant sought a review of this decision under section 35A(5) of the Federal Court of Australia Act 1976 (Cth). The central legal issue before the Court was whether it had the authority to review a Registrar's decision under rule 2.26 not to accept a document for filing.

In addressing the legal issue, the Court examined the relevant statutory and procedural frameworks. The Court considered the scope of section 35A(5) of the Federal Court of Australia Act 1976 (Cth), which allows for review of certain decisions made by a single judge or Registrar. The Court found that while section 35A(5) provides a broad avenue for review, it does not extend to decisions made under rule 2.26 concerning the acceptance or refusal of documents for filing. The Court concluded that such decisions fall within the inherent jurisdiction of the Registrar and are not subject to judicial review under section 35A(5). Consequently, the Court dismissed the applicant's application for review and ordered that the applicant pay the respondents' costs.

The Court's decision underscores the distinction between administrative decisions that are subject to judicial review and those that are within the inherent jurisdiction of a Registrar. The outcome highlights the importance of adhering to procedural rules and the limitations on judicial intervention in the internal processes of the Court.

Orders

Orders of the court

1. The applicant’s application of 14 September 2017 for review of the decision of a Registrar of this Court made on 24 August 2017 not to accept the applicant’s application and affidavit both dated 24 August 2017 for filing, is dismissed.

2. The applicant is to pay the respondents’ costs.

Note: Entry of orders is dealt with in Rule 39.32 of the Federal Court Rules 2011.

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.