Prescott v Finley

Link copied
Case Copied 1 min read

PRESCOTT

v

FINLEY & ANOR
[2020] HCASL 77
S337/2019

  1. The applicant requires an extension of time within which to file an application for special leave to appeal from the decision of the Family Court of Australia. An appeal to this Court would enjoy insufficient prospects of success to warrant the grant of special leave. Hence, it would be futile to grant the extension of time that is sought. Special leave 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.

V.M Bell S.J Gageler
18 March 2020
CaseChat AU logo

Keep reading for free

Create a free CaseChat account to read Prescott v Finley 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
[2020] HCASL 77
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The parties involved in the case were Prescott and Finley, with an additional unnamed party. The nature of the dispute was an application by Prescott for an extension of time within which to file an application for special leave to appeal from the decision of the Family Court of Australia. The application was heard by the High Court of Australia. The legal issues that the court was required to decide included whether the applicant's application for an extension of time should be granted, and whether an appeal to this Court would enjoy sufficient prospects of success to warrant the grant of special leave. The court also had to determine whether it would be futile to grant the extension of time that was sought.

The court reasoned that the applicant's appeal to the High Court would enjoy insufficient prospects of success to warrant the grant of special leave. As a result, it would be futile to grant the extension of time that was sought. The court held that special leave should be refused, and that it would be futile to grant the extension of time sought by the applicant. The court directed the Registrar to draw up, sign and seal an order dismissing the application, pursuant to r 41.08.1 of the High Court Rules 2004 (Cth). The final orders were that the application for special leave to appeal from the Family Court of Australia was dismissed, and the application for an extension of time within which to file the application was refused.

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.