Sibir v Glanville

[2000] FCA 1630

FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

Sibir v Glanville [2000] FCA 1630

ALEX SIBIR v DAREN GLANVILLE, RICHARD CHAN, OHNMAR KNIN and RON THOMPSON
N 413 of 2000

TAMBERLIN J
SYDNEY
9 NOVEMBER 2000

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
NEW SOUTH WALES DISTRICT REGISTRY	N413 OF 2000

BETWEEN:

ALEX SIBIR
APPLICANT

AND:

DAREN GLANVILLE
FIRST RESPONDENT

RICHARD CHAN
SECOND RESPONDENT

OHNMAR KNIN
THIRD RESPONDENT

RON THOMPSON
FOURTH RESPONDENT

JUDGE:	TAMBERLIN J
DATE:	9 NOVEMBER 2000
PLACE:	SYDNEY

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT

1. In this matter the applicant makes an application for an extension of time in which to file and serve a notice of appeal from the judgment of Sackville J given on 14 August this year.  The extension of time is required because a notice of appeal was not filed and served within the time limit imposed by O 52 r 15 of the Federal Court Rules.  It is common ground that the delay was only a short one and the respondents cannot point, or do not point, to any particular prejudice arising from the failure to lodge the notice of appeal within time.

2. However, the requirement that there should be leave to appeal or an extension of the time within which that must be done does raise the question of whether the appeal has any merit or prospects of success, or more particularly whether the judgment of Sackville J discloses any arguable error on the material which is before the court.  I have considered the judgment of Sackville J and attended carefully to everything that the applicant has advanced before me but I am not satisfied that any reasonable prospects for success on an appeal have been established.  Nor am I satisfied that any arguable error of law has been disclosed in the reasons of Sackville J.  The allegations which have been made are in broad and general terms and having read the carefully structured reasoning of his Honour I am not satisfied that there is any proper basis for challenging it by way of appeal.  Accordingly, I refuse leave to appeal and an extension of time in this matter. 

3. As far as costs are concerned, while I appreciate the applicant’s situation, the position is that the respondents have succeeded on the application and there are no special or exceptional circumstances which would warrant a departure from the normal ruling.  Therefore I award the respondents the costs of this application for an extension of time.

I certify that the preceding three (3) numbered paragraphs are a true copy of the Reasons for Judgment herein of the Honourable Justice Tamberlin.

Associate:

Dated:            15 November 2000

Counsel for the Applicant:	The applicant appeared in person
Counsel for the Respondent:	N Williams
Solicitor for the Respondent:	Australian Government Solicitor
Date of Hearing:	9 November 2000
Date of Judgment:	9 November 2000