Whittaker v Child Support Registrar (No. 4)

[2009] FCA 387

FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

Whittaker v Child Support Registrar (No. 4) [2009] FCA 387

MARK ALAN WHITTAKER and ROTARY KILN SERVICES (AUSTRALASIA) PTY LTD (ABN 51 128 856 431) v CHILD SUPPORT REGISTRAR and COMMONWEALTH OF AUSTRALIA

NSD 198 of 2009

GRAHAM J
8 APRIL 2009
SYDNEY

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
NEW SOUTH WALES DISTRICT REGISTRY	NSD 198 of 2009

BETWEEN:

MARK ALAN WHITTAKER
First Applicant

ROTARY KILN SERVICES (AUSTRALASIA) PTY LTD (ABN 51 128 856 431)
Second Applicant

AND:

CHILD SUPPORT REGISTRAR
First Respondent

COMMONWEALTH OF AUSTRALIA
Second Respondent

JUDGE:	GRAHAM J
DATE OF ORDER:	8 APRIL 2009
WHERE MADE:	SYDNEY

THE COURT ORDERS THAT:

1.The application made ore tenus to widen the scope of the application for leave to appeal to include a challenge to the primary judge’s findings in respect of paragraph 32 of the Amended Statement of Claim be dismissed.

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

The text of entered orders can be located using eSearch on the Court’s website.

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
NEW SOUTH WALES DISTRICT REGISTRY	NSD 198 of 2009

BETWEEN:

MARK ALAN WHITTAKER
First Applicant

ROTARY KILN SERVICES (AUSTRALASIA) PTY LTD (ABN 51 128 856 431)
Second Applicant

AND:

CHILD SUPPORT REGISTRAR
First Respondent

COMMONWEALTH OF AUSTRALIA
Second Respondent

JUDGE:	GRAHAM J
DATE:	8 APRIL 2009
PLACE:	SYDNEY

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT

1. I refer to my reasons for judgment in Whittaker v Child Support Registrar (No. 3) [2009] FCA 386.

2. An application has now been made to widen the scope of the leave to appeal application presently before the Court to include a challenge to the primary judge’s finding that leave to replead paragraph 32 of the Amended Statement of Claim should be refused.

3. For the reasons which I have previously advanced, in rejecting the application to widen the scope of the leave application to include challenges in respect of the refusal of leave to replead paragraphs 24 and 25, the application in respect of paragraph 32 of the Amended Statement of Claim should also be dismissed.

4. It may be noted, as recorded at [11] of the primary judge’s reasons for judgment of

   
   

   4 March 2009 that the applicants did not themselves press paragraph 32 of the Amended Statement of Claim.

5. I note that the applicants’ claim of alleged error in respect of the repleading of paragraphs 33 and 34 of the Amended Statement of Claim was not pressed.

I certify that the preceding five (5) numbered paragraphs are a true copy of the Reasons for Judgment herein of the Honourable Justice Graham.

Associate:

Dated:        22 April 2009

Counsel for the Applicants:	P E King
Solicitor for the Applicants:	McKells Solicitors
Solicitor for the Respondents:	A Markus of Australian Government Solicitor

Date of Hearing:	8 April 2009
Date of Judgment:	8 April 2009