Reynolds v Judicial Registrar Burns

[2025] FCA 186

FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

Reynolds v Judicial Registrar Burns [2025] FCA 186

File number(s):	VID 1287 of 2024
Judgment of:	NESKOVCIN J
Date of judgment:	12 March 2025
Date of publication of reasons:	13 March 2025
Catchwords:	PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – where applicant failed to appear – proceeding dismissed
Legislation:	Federal Court Rules2011 (Cth) rr 2.26, 30.22
Division:	General Division
Registry:	Victoria
National Practice Area:	Administrative and Constitutional Law and Human Rights
Number of paragraphs:	14
Date of hearing:	27 February 2025
Counsel for the Applicant:	The Applicant did not appear
Counsel for the Respondent:	The Respondent filed a submitting notice

ORDERS

VID 1287 of 2024

BETWEEN:

KELLAN REYNOLDS

Applicant

AND:

JUDICIAL REGISTRAR J BURNS

Respondent

ORDER MADE BY:	NESKOVCIN J
DATE OF ORDER:	12 MARCH 2025

THE COURT ORDERS THAT:

1.Pursuant to r 30.22 of the Federal Court Rules2011 (Cth), the proceeding is dismissed.

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

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT

NESKOVCIN J:

1. On 1 November 2024, the applicant lodged an originating application, concise statement, affidavit and notice of constitutional matter. On 7 November 2024, a Registrar of the Court decided to refuse to accept these documents for filing pursuant to r 2.26 of the Federal Court Rules 2011 (Cth) on the basis that they were an abuse of the Court’s process and frivolous or vexatious.

2. On 11 November 2024, the applicant filed an originating application seeking judicial review of the Registrar’s decision. The Registrar filed a submitting appearance.

3. At a case management hearing on 20 December 2024 conducted by Microsoft Teams, orders were made for the applicant to file submissions and any further affidavits on which he sought to rely in support of his application by 4:00pm on 31 January 2025 and the proceeding was listed for final hearing at 12:00pm (AEDT) on 27 February 2025 to be conducted by Teams. The reason the hearing was to commence at 12:00pm (AEDT) and be conducted by Teams was that the applicant is located in Western Australia and requested that the hearing proceed by way of audio visual link, as had the case management hearing. The commencement time of 12:00pm (AEDT) was to accommodate the time difference in Western Australia.

4. The 20 December 2024 orders were emailed to the applicant later that day.

5. The applicant did not file his materials by the time stipulated in the 20 December 2024 orders.

6. On 6 February 2025, by email to Chambers, the applicant requested an extension of time to file his material by “the end of this month”.

7. Later in the day, on 6 February 2025, an email was sent to the applicant in the following terms:

   Dear Mr Reynolds,

   I refer to your email below, noting that you have not been able to comply with the orders made by Justice Neskovcin on 20 December 2024 and you request an extension of time until the end of the month.

   The orders made on 20 December 2024 provide:

   1.By 4:00pm (AEDT) on 31 January 2025, the applicant file a written outline of submissions and any further affidavits on which he seeks to rely in support of the application dated 11 November 2024.

   2.The application is listed for hearing at 12:00pm (AEDT) on 27 February 2025 to be conducted by Microsoft Teams.

   In light of your request for an extension, her Honour proposes that:

   (a)order 1 of the orders made on 20 December 2024 be extended to 28 February 2025;

   (b)order 2 made on 20 December 2024 be vacated and, in its place, there be an order that the proceeding be listed for a case management hearing to be conducted by Microsoft Teams at 12noon (AEDT) on 14 March 2025.

   At the case management hearing on 14 March 2025, her Honour will consider whether the matter is ready to be set down for hearing and, if so, fix a date for the hearing.

   Please let me know if you are content with the proposed orders as set out above.

   Yours sincerely

8. The applicant did not respond to the email.

9. On 24 February 2025, a follow up email was sent to the applicant requesting a response to the 6 February 2025 email. Later in the day, on 24 February 2025, the applicant sent an email confirming that he intended to submit his submissions and affidavit that day. At 10:39pm on 24 February 2025, an email was received from the applicant attaching written submissions and a sworn affidavit.

10. The applicant did not, at any stage, respond to the matters raised in the 6 February 2025 email from Chambers, including as to the proposed orders.

11. At 11:16am (AEDT) on 26 February 2025, an email was sent to the applicant confirming the listing details for the hearing on 27 February 2025 and providing the Microsoft Teams link.  No response to the email was sent by the applicant and none was expected.

12. The hearing was scheduled to commence at 12:00pm (AEDT) on 27 February 2025. The applicant did not join the audio visual link prior to 12:00pm and had not done so by 12:15pm.

13. At 12:15pm, the hearing commenced. The matter was called and the applicant did not appear in person or via the audio visual link that was provided.

14. As the applicant did not appear on the day his proceeding was set down for trial, r 30.22 of the Rules applied. At the hearing on 27 February 2025, I indicated that I would make an order pursuant to r 30.22 dismissing the proceeding and provide my reasons later. The order dismissing the proceeding was made for the foregoing reasons.

I certify that the preceding fourteen (14) numbered paragraphs are a true copy of the Reasons for Judgment of the Honourable Justice Neskovcin.

Associate:

Dated:       13 March 2025