Chalmers, Alan v Deakin University [1997] FCA 766

Chalmers, Alan v Deakin University [1997] FCA 766

The Court refused to extend time because no acceptable explanation was given for any part of the delay, the applicant took no action to put the Judicial Registrar's decision in contest before 2 July 1997, and fairness as between the applicant and others in like positions militated against encouraging dilatory behaviour by applicants for review and their legal representatives.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
11 August 1997
Procedural Posture
Industrial Law Complaint of Unlawful Termination; Application for Extension of Time to Seek Review of a Judicial Registrar's Decision / Notice of Motion Dated 3 July 1997 for Extension of Time
Outcome
Application dismissed; extension of time refused.
Legal Topics
['unlawful Termination' 'extension of Time' "review of Judicial Registrar's Decision" 'delay' 'incorrect Legal Advice']
['industrial Law' 'employment Law'] ['unlawful Termination' 'extension of Time' "review of Judicial Registrar's Decision" 'delay' 'incorrect Legal Advice']

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

Industrial Law Complaint of Unlawful Termination; Application for Extension of Time to Seek Review of a Judicial Registrar's Decision / Notice of Motion Dated 3 July 1997 for Extension of Time

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether the applicant should be granted an extension of time within which to seek review of the Judicial Registrar's decision." 'Whether there was an acceptable explanation for the delay in filing and serving the review application.' 'Whether other discretionary factors, including action taken to notify the respondent, prejudice, merits, and fairness as between persons in like positions, supported an extension of time.']

Ratio Decidendi

The Court refused to extend time because no acceptable explanation was given for any part of the delay, the applicant took no action to put the Judicial Registrar's decision in contest before 2 July 1997, and fairness as between the applicant and others in like positions militated against encouraging dilatory behaviour by applicants for review and their legal representatives.

Court Disposition

Application dismissed; extension of time refused.

Orders

  • ["The applicant's notice of motion dated 3 July 1997 is dismissed."]