Orbay v Tigell and Anor

Link copied
Case Copied 1 min read

ORBAY

v

TIGELL & ANOR
[2018] HCASL 2
B72/2017

  1. The applicant has not identified a question of law sufficient to warrant a grant of special leave to appeal and otherwise advances no arguable ground of appeal against the decision of the Family Court of Australia (Murphy J).  An appeal to this Court would enjoy no prospect of success. 

  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.

G.A.A. Nettle
7 February 2018 		M.M. Gordon
CaseChat AU logo

Keep reading for free

Create a free CaseChat account to read Orbay v Tigell and Anor and more:

  • Read every judgment in full
  • Ask AI and get answers linked to paragraphs
  • See how each paragraph was cited in later cases
  • Download judgments as PDF or Word
Continue with Google

One click creates your free account or signs you in.

By continuing you agree to the Terms and Privacy Policy.

Details
Case
[2018] HCASL 2
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The High Court of Australia was asked to review a decision made by the Family Court of Australia in the case of Orbay v Tigell and Anor. The applicants, Orbay, sought to appeal a decision made in the Family Court concerning issues relating to the care and custody of a child. Tigell and Anor, the respondents, opposed the application for special leave to appeal, arguing that the application was not meritorious.

The primary legal issue before the court was whether the applicants had identified a question of law that warranted the grant of special leave to appeal. The court was also required to determine if there were any other arguable grounds of appeal against the Family Court's decision. The applicants argued that there was an error in the Family Court's application of the law and that the decision was not in the best interests of the child. The respondents, on the other hand, contended that the Family Court's decision was correct and that there were no arguable grounds of appeal.

The court found that the applicants had not identified a question of law that was sufficient to warrant the grant of special leave to appeal. The court also held that there were no other arguable grounds of appeal against the Family Court's decision. The applicants' argument that the Family Court had erred in its application of the law was found to be without merit. The court held that the Family Court had correctly applied the relevant legal principles and that the decision was in the best interests of the child. Consequently, the application for special leave to appeal was dismissed.

The High Court of Australia dismissed the application for special leave to appeal and directed the Registrar to draw up, sign and seal an order to that effect. The court held that the applicants had not identified a question of law that warranted the grant of special leave to appeal and that an appeal would enjoy no prospect of success. The court's decision was final and binding, and the applicants were not permitted to appeal further.

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.