Shields, Isaac John MacKay v Official Receiver in Bankruptcy

[1996] FCA 757

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA  ) 
  )  
NEW SOUTH WALES DISTRICT REGISTRY                    )  No NG 617 of 1996
  )  
GENERAL DIVISION  )     

BETWEEN:                ISAAC JOHN MACKAY SHIELDS 

First Applicant

GEOFFREY NEIL KEITH SHIELDS

Second Applicant

NORMA ROSE SHIELDS

Third Applicant

AND:  OFFICIAL RECEIVER IN BANKRUPTCY & OFFICIAL TRUSTEE IN BANKRUPTCY

Respondents

Coram: Davies J.
Date:               12 August 1996
Place:              Sydney

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT

This is an application for an extension of time in which to file and serve a notice of appeal against a judgment of Beazley J given on 7 December 1995.  Mr Isaac Shields ("Mr Shields") had earlier appealed from her Honour's judgment and the matter went to the Full Court.  The Court considered that Mr Shields did not have standing to bring the appeal as the relevant issue which was before Beazley J was an issue of trespass and the proprietors of the land, Mr Geoffrey Neil Keith Shields and Mrs Norma Rose

Shields, were not parties to the appeal. 

In dismissing the appeal, the Chief Justice said that although Mr Shields had been a party to the proceedings before Beazley J, he was not a party in respect of the issue of trespass.  The Chief Justice expressed the view that Mr Shields could not maintain an appeal in respect of those parts of the proceedings as to which he had not been an applicant.  Carr J said that in his view Mr Shields had no legal or other relevant interest in the questions before the Full Court.  Kiefel J agreed with the Chief Justice and Carr J.  Accordingly, the appeal was dismissed. 

That, of course, would not preclude an application being made for the filing of a notice of appeal out of time.  However, the present application has been brought again by Mr Shields.  He appears to have taken the view that it was sufficient for him to add the names of Geoffrey Neil Keith Shields and Norma Rose Shields to the application.  The application as lodged includes Mr Shields as an applicant and is signed by him and by him alone.

In my opinion, the Full Court has ruled that Mr Shields has no standing in relation to this matter.  Any application for an extension of time must therefore be an application by Geoffrey Neil Keith Shields and Norma Rose Shields.  If there were to be such an application, it would have to be an application signed by them.  That is not the present position and it seems to me that the position is, as it was before the Full Court, that there is before me a matter in which Mr Isaac Shields himself wishes to challenge the judgment of Beazley J on this point of alleged trespass.  He has no standing and therefore his application for an extension of time must be dismissed. 

The application will be dismissed with costs. 

I certify that this and the 2 preceding pages
are a true copy of the reasons for judgment herein of
the Honourable Justice Davies.

Associate:

Date:  12 August 1996

Applicant:  Mr Shields in person

Counsel for the respondent:  S.S. Nash (sol)

Solicitors for the respondent:  Sally Nash & Co.

Date of hearing:  12 August 1996

Date of judgment:  12 August 1996