The Commonwealth of Australia v Brandon, M.J

[1994] FCA 795

a

. -79s Jw

JUDGMENT No. ., , , , .

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA )

1

NEW SOUTH WALES DISTRICT REGISTRY ) No. NG 374 of 1994

)

GENERAL DIVISION 1

BETWEEN:  THE COMMONWEALTH OF AUSTRALIA

Applicant

AND:  MARK JOHN BRANDON

Respondent

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA )

1

NEW SOUTH WALES DISTRICT REGISTRY ) No. NG 375 of 1994

)

GENERAL DIVISION )

BETWEEN:  THE COMMONWEALTH OF AUSTRALIA

Applicant

AND:  MICHAEL JOHN ROCK

Respondent

JUDGE HAKING OORERS:	FOSTER J
DATE :	1 NOVEMBER 1994
PLACE r	SYDNEY

B: Settlement and entry of orders is dealt with in Order 36 of the Federal Court Rules.

FEDERAL COURT 0,
AUSTRALIA

S N O T E OF ORDERS PRINCIPAL REQISTR*

P:

1.   the Commonwealth's Notices of Motion be dismissed in each case.

2.   in each case the Commonwealth pay the applicant's costs of the Notice of Motion.

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA	)
1
NEW SOUTH WALES DISTRICT REGISTRY )	No. NG 374 of 1994

)

GENERAL DIVISION 1

BETWEEN:  THE COMMONWEALTH OF AUSTRALIA

Applicant

m:  MAFlK JOHN BRANDON

Respondent

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA	) )
NEW SOUTH WALES DISTRICT REGISTRY )	No. NG 375 of 1994

1

GENERAL DIVISION 1

BETWEEN:  THE COMMONWEALTH OF AUSTRALIA
Applicant

AND:  MICHAEL JOHN ROCK

Respondent

CORAH:	FOSTER J 1 NOVEMBER 1994
PIACE: SYDNEY
HIS EOnOUR:	In both these cases the respondent has pleaded

defences similar to those pleaded in the matter of m. In

these cases, however, it is not suggested that any relevant limitation period had expired before the coming into effect of

. .

s 44 of the SBfetv R n o - and Comoensation Act 1988

(Cth). It would appear, however, that any relevant limitation period has since expired and that accordingly the actions can proceed only if an extension of time is granted. In my view, for reasons substantially similar to those I have given in

B, it cannot be said that either the actions themselves

or the applications for extension of time are so untenable as

to warrant their being struck out.

Accordingly, I make the following orders:

1.    That the Commonwealth's Notices of Motion be dismissed in

each came.

2.     That in each case the Commonwealth pay the applicant's

costs of the Notice of Motion.

I certify that this and the preceding one (1) page are a true copy of the reasons for judgment herein of the Honourable Mr Justice M. L. Foster.

Associate:
Date :	1 NOVEMBER 1994