Zollo & Anor v Polley

Link copied
Case Copied 1 min read

ZOLLO & ANOR

v

POLLEY & ORS

[2022] HCASL 72
A45/2021

  1. An extension of time is necessary to enable this application for special leave to appeal to proceed. The application for special leave does not show that the foreshadowed appeal would turn upon the resolution of an issue of principle of general importance; and indeed, it does not identify any reason to doubt the correctness of the decision of the Full Court of the Supreme Court of South Australia. The application should be dismissed. That being so, it would be futile to grant an extension of time.

  2. Pursuant to r 41.08.1 of the High Court Rules 2004 (Cth), we direct the Registrar to draw up, sign and seal an order dismissing the application.

P.A. Keane J.J. Edelman
20 April 2022
CaseChat AU logo

Keep reading for free

Create a free CaseChat account to read Zollo & Anor v Polley and more:

  • Read every judgment in full
  • Ask AI and get answers linked to paragraphs
  • See how each paragraph was cited in later cases
  • Download judgments as PDF or Word
Continue with Google

One click creates your free account or signs you in.

By continuing you agree to the Terms and Privacy Policy.

Details
Case
[2022] HCASL 72
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In the matter of Zollo & Anor v Polley, the High Court of Australia dismissed an application for special leave to appeal. The applicants sought to appeal a decision of the Full Court of the Supreme Court of South Australia, which was handed down on 14 April 2021. The nature of the dispute involves legal proceedings between the parties, however, the specifics of the underlying case are not detailed in the court's summary.

The primary legal issue before the High Court was whether the application for special leave to appeal demonstrated that the proposed appeal would hinge on a matter of principle with general importance, or if it identified any reason to question the correctness of the Full Court's decision. The court found that the application did not meet the required threshold for special leave to be granted.

In reaching its decision, the High Court emphasised that the application for special leave did not reveal any doubt about the Full Court's decision. The court held that there was no basis to grant an extension of time for the application, as it would be futile to do so. Consequently, the High Court dismissed the application for special leave to appeal. The court also directed the Registrar to draw up, sign and seal an order dismissing the application, in accordance with Rule 41.08.1 of the High Court Rules 2004 (Cth).

Orders

Orders of the court

Full text does not contain this section.

Background

Background to the litigation

Full text does not contain this section.

Evidence

Evidence Before The Court

Full text does not contain this section.

Decision

Reasons for decision

Full text does not contain this section.

Ratio Decidendi

Legal Principle Established

Full text does not contain this section.