Samootin v Shea [2013] NSWCA 312

Samootin v Shea [2013] NSWCA 312

The review failed because no error of principle or plainly wrong decision was shown in Campbell JA's dismissal of the 2012 application as an abuse of process. Ms Samootin lacked standing to pursue claims concerning rights that vested in the Official Trustee in Bankruptcy, CEDAW did not provide directly enforceable domestic rights or invalidate the prior orders, no error was shown in the treatment of the federal treaty jurisdiction argument, the Teoh-type order was justified by the litigation history, and the Court of Appeal had no power to transfer the proceedings to the High Court.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
20 September 2013
Procedural Posture
Application for Review Under S 46(4) of the Supreme Court Act 1970 and Applications Concerning Removal or Transfer to the High Court / Court of Appeal Review of Decision of a Single Judge of Appeal Dismissing Leave Application as an Abuse of Process
Outcome
Application dismissed.
Legal Topics
['abuse of Process' 'standing After Bankruptcy' 'teoh Type Order' 'removal of Proceedings to the High Court' 'effect of International Treaties in Australian Domestic Law' 'cedaw']
['appeal Practice and Procedure' 'bankruptcy' 'constitutional Law' 'international Law'] ['abuse of Process' 'standing After Bankruptcy' 'teoh Type Order' 'removal of Proceedings to the High Court' 'effect of International Treaties in Australian Domestic Law' 'cedaw']

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

Application for Review Under S 46(4) of the Supreme Court Act 1970 and Applications Concerning Removal or Transfer to the High Court / Court of Appeal Review of Decision of a Single Judge of Appeal Dismissing Leave Application as an Abuse of Process

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether Campbell JA erred in dismissing Ms Samootin's application for leave to appeal as an abuse of process." 'Whether Ms Samootin had standing to challenge orders concerning rights that vested in the Official Trustee in Bankruptcy.' 'Whether CEDAW or international law required a different result or rendered prior orders void ab initio.' 'Whether the High Court had exclusive jurisdiction under s 38(a) of the Judiciary Act 1903 (Cth) because the matter arose under a treaty.' 'Whether the Teoh-type order made by Campbell JA should be set aside.' 'Whether the Court of Appeal had power to transfer the proceedings to the High Court of Australia.']

Ratio Decidendi

The review failed because no error of principle or plainly wrong decision was shown in Campbell JA's dismissal of the 2012 application as an abuse of process. Ms Samootin lacked standing to pursue claims concerning rights that vested in the Official Trustee in Bankruptcy, CEDAW did not provide directly enforceable domestic rights or invalidate the prior orders, no error was shown in the treatment of the federal treaty jurisdiction argument, the Teoh-type order was justified by the litigation history, and the Court of Appeal had no power to transfer the proceedings to the High Court.

Court Disposition

Application dismissed.

Orders

  • ["The applicant's notices of motion filed 4 December 2012, 22 March 2013 and 28 May 2013 are each dismissed." 'No costs order was made in favour of any listed respondent because none appeared on the hearing of the applications.']