Dunghutti Elders Council (Aboriginal Corporation) RNTBC v Registrar of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Corporations (No 2) [2011] FCAFC 110

Dunghutti Elders Council (Aboriginal Corporation) RNTBC v Registrar of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Corporations (No 2) [2011] FCAFC 110

The Full Court declined to reopen the principal judgment because the Roberts bias point was not argued before the primary judge, was not squarely and unambiguously raised in the Notice of Appeal, was not argued in written submissions or oral argument on appeal, was expressly disavowed in oral argument, and reopening would be futile because the point was in any event without merit.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
25 August 2011
Procedural Posture
Appeal; Interlocutory Application to Reopen or Vacate Full Court Judgment / Full Court of the Federal Court, Decided on the Papers Before Entry of Orders
Outcome
Interlocutory Application filed on behalf of the first appellant on 2 August 2011 dismissed; costs reserved.
Legal Topics
['reopening Judgment Before Entry of Orders' 'apprehended Bias' 'procedural Fairness' 'show Cause Notice' 'special Administration']
['practice and Procedure' 'administrative Law' 'corporations (aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander) Regulation'] ['reopening Judgment Before Entry of Orders' 'apprehended Bias' 'procedural Fairness' 'show Cause Notice' 'special Administration']

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 1 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Procedural Posture

Appeal; Interlocutory Application to Reopen or Vacate Full Court Judgment / Full Court of the Federal Court, Decided on the Papers Before Entry of Orders

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether the Full Court should reopen or vacate its principal judgment to deal with the first appellant's Roberts bias point." 'Whether the Roberts bias point had been argued before the primary judge, raised on appeal, advanced in written submissions or oral argument, or expressly disavowed.' 'Whether reopening would be futile because the Roberts bias point was without merit.']

Ratio Decidendi

The Full Court declined to reopen the principal judgment because the Roberts bias point was not argued before the primary judge, was not squarely and unambiguously raised in the Notice of Appeal, was not argued in written submissions or oral argument on appeal, was expressly disavowed in oral argument, and reopening would be futile because the point was in any event without merit.

Court Disposition

Interlocutory Application filed on behalf of the first appellant on 2 August 2011 dismissed; costs reserved.

Orders

  • ['The Interlocutory Application filed on behalf of the first appellant on 2 August 2011 be dismissed.' 'The costs of that application be reserved.']