Dalgarno v Hannah [1903] HCA 1
The High Court exercised its discretion and determined that, notwithstanding arguments about constitutional or statutory sources of appellate jurisdiction, the nature of the case does not justify granting special leave to appeal. The order granting leave is rescinded.
- Parties
- Appellant; Defendant: Dalgarno; Respondent; Plaintiff: Hannah
- Jurisdiction
- Australia
- Judgment Date
- 11 November 1903
- Procedural Posture
- Motion to Rescind Order Granting Special Leave to Appeal / Determination of Motion for Rescission of Special Leave to Appeal
- Outcome
- Motion granted; leave to appeal rescinded; costs ordered against appellant
- Legal Topics
- Appeals, Federal Jurisdiction, Special Leave to Appeal, Negligence, Retrospective Operation of Statutes
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Dalgarno
Appellant; Defendant
Hannah
Respondent; Plaintiff
Procedural Posture
Motion to Rescind Order Granting Special Leave to Appeal / Determination of Motion for Rescission of Special Leave to Appeal
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the High Court has jurisdiction to entertain appeals from judgments pronounced before the passing of the Judiciary Act 1903
- 2 Whether the case justifies granting special leave to appeal even if jurisdiction exists
Ratio Decidendi
The High Court exercised its discretion and determined that, notwithstanding arguments about constitutional or statutory sources of appellate jurisdiction, the nature of the case does not justify granting special leave to appeal. The order granting leave is rescinded.
Court Disposition
Motion granted; leave to appeal rescinded; costs ordered against appellant
Orders
- Order for leave to appeal rescinded
- Appellant to pay respondent's costs of the motion
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment