Lucic, A.P. v. Nolan, R. & Ors [1982] FCA 232

Lucic, A.P. v. Nolan, R. & Ors [1982] FCA 232

The applicant failed to provide any satisfactory explanation for the inordinate and inexcusable delay in seeking review, both before and after obtaining legal advice. The public interest in finality of administrative decisions and the absence of exceptional circumstances justified refusal of extension of time.

Parties
Applicant: Anton Paul Lucic; First Respondent: Robert Nolan; Second Respondent: Allan Nimmo Jacobs; Third Respondent: John Langler; Fourth Respondent: Brian Flynn; Fifth Respondent: Sir William Cole; Sixth Respondent: R.J. Young; Seventh Respondent: J.V. Monaghan
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
01 November 1982
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review Application / Extension of Time Application
Outcome
Application for extension of time dismissed; application for review to be dismissed as a consequence; applicant to pay taxed costs.
Legal Topics
Judicial Review, Extension of Time, Public Service Disciplinary Proceedings
Administrative Law Public Service Law Judicial Review Extension of Time Public Service Disciplinary Proceedings

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 2 Authorities cited 5 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Anton Paul Lucic

Applicant

Robert Nolan

First Respondent

Allan Nimmo Jacobs

Second Respondent

John Langler

Third Respondent

Brian Flynn

Fourth Respondent

Sir William Cole

Fifth Respondent

R.J. Young

Sixth Respondent

J.V. Monaghan

Seventh Respondent

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review Application / Extension of Time Application

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether an extension of time should be granted for filing an application for review of decisions in public service disciplinary proceedings.

Ratio Decidendi

The applicant failed to provide any satisfactory explanation for the inordinate and inexcusable delay in seeking review, both before and after obtaining legal advice. The public interest in finality of administrative decisions and the absence of exceptional circumstances justified refusal of extension of time.

Court Disposition

Application for extension of time dismissed; application for review to be dismissed as a consequence; applicant to pay taxed costs.

Orders

  • The Applicant's application for an order that the time for filing his application to review the decision of the Disciplinary Appeal Board be extended to 27th day of October 1982 is dismissed.
  • Subject to any further argument, the Application for Review should also be dismissed by reason of the refusal of the extension of time.