The Republic of Nauru v WET040Citation:[2018] HCA 56Before:Gageler, Nettle, Edelman JJDate:07 Nov 2018Case Number:M154/2017Read more
The appeal was instituted before the termination of the Agreement because the notice of appeal was filed and an application for extension of time was made before the termination date. Therefore, the High Court retained jurisdiction to hear and determine the appeal.
- Parties
- Appellant: Appellant; Respondent: Respondent
- Jurisdiction
- Australia
- Judgment Date
- 07 November 2018
- Procedural Posture
- Appeal / Judgment
- Outcome
- Appeal allowed
- Legal Topics
- Original Jurisdiction, Appeal From Supreme Court of Nauru, Termination of Agreement, Institution of Appeal, Extension of Time
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Appellant
Appellant
Respondent
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Judgment
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the appeal was 'instituted' before the termination of the Agreement between Australia and Nauru
- 2 Whether the High Court had jurisdiction to hear and determine the appeal after the Agreement's termination
- 3 Whether the late filing of the notice of appeal affected the institution of the appeal
Ratio Decidendi
The appeal was instituted before the termination of the Agreement because the notice of appeal was filed and an application for extension of time was made before the termination date. Therefore, the High Court retained jurisdiction to hear and determine the appeal.
Court Disposition
Appeal allowed
Orders
- The appeal is allowed.
- The order enlarging the time for filing the notice of appeal is granted.
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