Maxims Entertainment Pty Ltd v Chinatown Enterprises Pty Ltd [2000] FCA 1485

Maxims Entertainment Pty Ltd v Chinatown Enterprises Pty Ltd [2000] FCA 1485

Mr Cheung failed to establish 'special reasons' for extension of time as required by O 52 r 15(2) FCRs. The reasons given were insufficient, delay was unexplained, and no real prospect of success was demonstrated regarding any of the three judgments. Burchett J had validly dispensed with rules of evidence under O 33 r 3; matters could be 'not bona fide in dispute' even if not expressly admitted, particularly where the opposing party failed to attend a hearing with notice.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
23 October 2000
Procedural Posture
Application for Extension of Time to Appeal / Decision on Application for Extension of Time
Outcome
application dismissed with costs
Legal Topics
['extension of Time for Appeal' 'dispensing With Rules of Evidence']
['practice and Procedure' 'evidence'] ['extension of Time for Appeal' 'dispensing With Rules of Evidence']

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 1 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Procedural Posture

Application for Extension of Time to Appeal / Decision on Application for Extension of Time

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether 'special reasons' exist to extend time for appeal under Federal Court Rules, O 52 r 15(2)" "Whether rules of evidence may be dispensed with for matters 'not bona fide in dispute' under O 33 r 3"]

Ratio Decidendi

Mr Cheung failed to establish 'special reasons' for extension of time as required by O 52 r 15(2) FCRs. The reasons given were insufficient, delay was unexplained, and no real prospect of success was demonstrated regarding any of the three judgments. Burchett J had validly dispensed with rules of evidence under O 33 r 3; matters could be 'not bona fide in dispute' even if not expressly admitted, particularly where the opposing party failed to attend a hearing with notice.

Court Disposition

application dismissed with costs

Orders

  • ["The third respondent's application be dismissed." "The third respondent pay the applicants' costs of the application."]