Schaefer v Guthrey Summary

ERIC JOSEPH SCHAEFER v. LLOYD GUTHREY CHAIRMAN STATE HOUSING COMMISSION
No. WG 155 of 1997
FED No. 1757/98
Number of pages - 1

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

WESTERN AUSTRALIA DISTRICT REGISTRY

GENERAL DIVISION

TAMBERLIN J

PERTH, 26 November 1998 (hearing and decision)

#DATE 26:11:1998

The Applicant applicant appeared in person.

Counsel for the Respondent: Mr R E Cock QC

Solicitor for the Respondent: Australian Government Solicitor

TAMBERLIN J

In this matter, I have considered the submissions which have been advanced by both parties. I have paid particular attention to those advanced by Mr Schaefer in respect of this application for review under section 18AC of the Federal Court of Australia Act 1976 (Cth) of the decision of Judicial Registrar Farrell of 22 May 1998.

I am satisfied that the application as brought by Mr Schaefer does not disclose any reasonable cause of action and I am not, therefore, persuaded that there has been any reviewable error committed by the judicial registrar in the reasons for decision, which were under contest this afternoon. Accordingly I dismiss the application for review.

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The case of Schaefer v Guthrey is an application for judicial review brought by Eric Joseph Schaefer against Lloyd Guthrey, the Chairman of the State Housing Commission. Schaefer sought to challenge a decision made by Judicial Registrar Farrell on May 22, 1998, through a review application under section 18AC of the Federal Court of Australia Act 1976. The dispute primarily centred around the merits and legality of the decision made by the judicial registrar.

The central legal issue before the court was whether the application for review by Schaefer disclosed a reasonable cause of action against the decision of the judicial registrar. The court needed to determine if there was a reviewable error in the reasons provided by the judicial registrar that warranted overturning the decision.

Justice Tamberlin, who presided over the case, meticulously examined the submissions from both parties. After considering the arguments presented, particularly those made by Schaefer, Justice Tamberlin concluded that the application did not reveal any reasonable cause of action. The court found that there was no reviewable error in the judicial registrar's reasons for decision, and thus, the application for review was without merit. Consequently, the court dismissed the application.

The final orders of the court were that the application for review brought by Eric Joseph Schaefer against the decision of the judicial registrar was dismissed. The court found no reviewable error in the decision or the reasons provided, and therefore, the application was not successful.

Schaefer v Guthrey

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established