Waterhouse v Independent Commission Against Corruption (No 2)

The applicant, Waterhouse, sought to re-open orders previously made by the Court of Appeal of New South Wales granting him leave to appeal on a limited basis against decisions of the Independent Commission Against Corruption. The application concerned the review of post-judgment directions issued by the Registrar and whether the applicant was entitled to a hearing in open court regarding these directions.

The central legal issues before the Court were whether there was an arguable basis for re-opening the previous orders, particularly concerning the scope of reasons provided when refusing leave to appeal and the imposition of time limits for oral submissions. The Court also considered whether the original grant of leave had been made under a misapprehension of the facts or relevant law, and the application of rule 36.16 of the Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 2005 (NSW).

The Court dismissed the applicant's notice of motion, finding no arguable basis for re-opening the prior orders. The Court reasoned that the applicant had not demonstrated that the original grant of leave was vitiated by a misapprehension of fact or law, nor that the Registrar's directions were beyond the scope of the original orders. The Court ordered that a revised draft notice of appeal be filed by a specified date, failing which the remaining part of the application for leave to appeal would stand dismissed.