Parthy v Grow MF Pty Ltd [2024] FCA 96

Parthy v Grow MF Pty Ltd [2024] FCA 96

The orders setting the matter down for a three day in-person hearing in Melbourne were discretionary practice and procedure orders that did not determine substantive rights. Mr Parthy did not show that the orders were attended with sufficient doubt, involved discretionary error, or would cause substantial injustice...

Source-derived case information.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
16 February 2024
Procedural Posture
Application for Leave to Appeal / Leave to Appeal From Interlocutory Practice and Procedure Orders
Outcome
Application for leave to appeal dismissed.
Legal Topics
['leave to Appeal' 'interlocutory Orders' 'discretionary Case Management Orders' 'in Person Hearing' 'self Represented Litigant']
['practice and Procedure' 'employment and Industrial Relations'] ['leave to Appeal' 'interlocutory Orders' 'discretionary Case Management Orders' 'in Person Hearing' 'self Represented Litigant']

Source-derived case record

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 Leave to Appeal / Leave to Appeal From Interlocutory Practice and Procedure Orders

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether leave should be granted to appeal an order setting the matter down for a three day in-person hearing in Melbourne.' "Whether the primary judge's discretionary practice and procedure order was attended with sufficient doubt to warrant reconsideration by a Full Court." 'Whether substantial injustice would result if leave to appeal were refused.']

Ratio Decidendi

The orders setting the matter down for a three day in-person hearing in Melbourne were discretionary practice and procedure orders that did not determine substantive rights. Mr Parthy did not show that the orders were attended with sufficient doubt, involved discretionary error, or would cause substantial injustice if leave were refused. It remained open to him to seek a longer hearing before the primary judge and there was insufficient basis to disturb the requirement for an in-person hearing in Melbourne.

Court Disposition

Application for leave to appeal dismissed.

Orders

  • ['The application for leave be dismissed.']