Tosson Mahmoud v Vincent Sutherland

TOSSON MAHMOUD
v
VINCENT SUTHERLAND & ANOR
[2013] HCASL 108
S309/2012

The applicant seeks special leave to appeal against orders of the Court of Appeal of the Supreme Court of New South Wales (Barrett JA, Tobias AJA and Blanch J) made in the applicant's application for judicial review of orders of the District Court of New South Wales (Knox DCJ) made on appeal from the Local Court of that State.
The Local Court had dismissed, with costs, the applicant's application for an apprehended violence order against the first respondent. The District Court dismissed the applicant's appeal. The Court of Appeal set aside the District Court's order of dismissal insofar as it dismissed the applicant's appeal against the costs order made in the Local Court but otherwise dismissed the application.
As the applicant does not have legal representation, the application falls to be dealt with under r 41.10 of the High Court Rules 2004.
The applicant does not have sufficient prospects of succeeding in disturbing the actual orders made by the Court of Appeal to warrant a grant of special leave.
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 case of Tosson Mahmoud versus Vincent Sutherland and another involves an application for special leave to appeal against orders made by the Court of Appeal of the Supreme Court of New South Wales. The applicant, Tosson Mahmoud, sought judicial review of orders from the District Court of New South Wales, which had dismissed an appeal against the Local Court's dismissal of Mahmoud's application for an apprehended violence order against the first respondent, Vincent Sutherland. The Court of Appeal upheld the dismissal of the appeal but set aside the costs order from the Local Court. Mahmoud, proceeding without legal representation, sought special leave to appeal to the High Court under rule 41.10 of the High Court Rules 2004.

The primary legal issues the court needed to address were whether the applicant had sufficient prospects of success in his appeal and whether the orders made by the Court of Appeal warranted a grant of special leave. The court had to evaluate the merits of Mahmoud's application for special leave, considering the absence of legal representation and the likelihood of success in overturning the Court of Appeal's decision. The court was also required to ensure the application adhered to the procedural requirements set out in the High Court Rules.

The court concluded that Mahmoud did not have sufficient prospects of succeeding in overturning the Court of Appeal's orders. The court found that the application did not meet the threshold for granting special leave as it was unlikely that Mahmoud would succeed in disturbing the orders made by the Court of Appeal. The court directed the Registrar to prepare an order dismissing Mahmoud's application for special leave in accordance with rule 41.10.5 of the High Court Rules 2004. This decision was made by Justices Hayne and Crennan on 26 June 2013.

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