The Bendigo Adelaide Bank Ltd

HARLEY ROBERT WILLIAMSON & ANOR

THE BENDIGO ADELAIDE BANK LTD
[2013] HCASL 107
P36/2012

The applicants seek special leave to appeal against orders of the Court of Appeal of the Supreme Court of Western Australia (Pullin and Murphy JJA) dismissing an appeal against a decision of the Supreme Court of Western Australia (Master Sanderson).
On 10 April 2012, the Supreme Court ordered the applicants to deliver up vacant possession of a property and to pay certain amounts owing to the respondent under a home loan agreement and a credit card agreement, together with interest and costs.
On 12 October 2012, the Court of Appeal unanimously dismissed the applicants' application for an extension of time, dismissed the application for leave to appeal and dismissed the appeal. The Court of Appeal found that nothing in any of the grounds of appeal or the submissions provided any basis for concluding that the Master had erred in the orders that were made.
This special leave application is brought out of time and the applicants seek an order under r 41.02.2 of the High Court Rules 2004 dispensing with the need to comply with the time limit in r 41.02.1.
As the applicants do not have legal representation, the application falls to be dealt with under r 41.10.
There is no reason to doubt the correctness of the decision of the Court of Appeal. An appeal to this Court would not enjoy sufficient prospects of success to warrant a grant of special leave to appeal.
Pursuant to r 41.10.5 we direct the Registrar to draw up, sign and seal an order dismissing the application.

K.M. Hayne
26 June 2013

S.M. Crennan

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The applicants, Harley Robert Williamson and another, sought special leave to appeal against the Court of Appeal of the Supreme Court of Western Australia's dismissal of their appeal against an earlier Supreme Court decision. The earlier decision ordered the applicants to deliver up vacant possession of a property and to pay certain amounts owing to the respondent, the Bendigo Adelaide Bank Ltd, under a home loan agreement and a credit card agreement, along with interest and costs. The applicants' appeal to the Court of Appeal was dismissed on 12 October 2012, with the Court of Appeal finding no basis for concluding that the Master had erred in the orders made. The applicants now seek special leave to appeal against the Court of Appeal's decision, arguing that the application is brought out of time and requesting an order under rule 41.02.2 of the High Court Rules 2004 to dispense with the need to comply with the time limit in rule 41.02.1.

The primary legal issue before the court was whether the applicants' special leave application, brought out of time, should be granted. This required an assessment of the prospects of success of an appeal to the High Court, given the Court of Appeal's unanimous dismissal of the appeal on the grounds that there was no error in the Master's decision. The applicants, without legal representation, needed to demonstrate that the Court of Appeal's decision was incorrect and that an appeal to the High Court had sufficient prospects of success. The court considered the correctness of the Court of Appeal's decision and whether there was any basis to doubt its correctness.

The court concluded that there was no reason to doubt the correctness of the Court of Appeal's decision and that the applicants' appeal to the High Court would not enjoy sufficient prospects of success. Given that the applicants' special leave application was brought out of time, the court deemed it appropriate to dismiss the application. The court found no merit in the applicants' argument that their appeal had sufficient prospects of success to warrant a grant of special leave to appeal. The court's reasoning was based on the Court of Appeal's unanimous finding that the Master's decision was correct and that the appeal had no basis. Consequently, the court dismissed the application for special leave to appeal and directed the Registrar to draw up, sign and seal an order to that effect.

Keep reading for free

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established