Oliver Markisic v Attorney General for New South Wales Dragan Markisic v Attorney General for New South Wales

The case involves two applicants, Oliver Markisic and Dragan Markisic, who brought proceedings against the Attorney General for New South Wales. Both applicants sought various orders against the Attorney General, and their cases were heard by a Magistrate. The primary issue before the court was whether the Magistrate's refusal to sign Court Attendance Notices directed to Supreme Court judges constituted a decision that was appealable under statute. The applicants argued that the Magistrate's role in signing such notices was a statutory function, and therefore, their refusal was subject to appeal. The court had to determine the nature of the function performed by the Magistrate and whether the applicants had a statutory right of appeal in relation to the exercise of that function.

The court considered the nature of the function performed by the Magistrate. It concluded that the decision to sign or refuse to sign a Court Attendance Notice was not a statutory function. Instead, it was part of the inherent jurisdiction of the court to manage its own processes. Given this finding, the court found that the applicants did not have a statutory right of appeal concerning the exercise of that function by the Magistrate. The court further analysed the nature of the summonses brought by the applicants, determining that they should be treated as applications for prerogative relief. The applicants had not demonstrated a basis for the exercise of prerogative relief, leading the court to conclude that the summonses had no prospects of success.

Consequently, the court dismissed the summonses on the basis that they had no prospects of success. The court found that there was no basis for the exercise of prerogative relief in the circumstances presented. The applicants' arguments and the evidence provided did not support the grant of the relief sought. The court's decision was grounded in the lack of a statutory right of appeal concerning the exercise of the Magistrate's function and the absence of a basis for the exercise of prerogative relief. This ruling effectively ended the applicants' attempts to secure the relief they sought against the Attorney General for New South Wales.