Sarkisian v Australian Federal Government [2008] FCA 981

Sarkisian v Australian Federal Government [2008] FCA 981

The application for an order of review was bound to fail because the matter had not been served, there was no proper respondent, and the underlying proposed application and affidavit did not disclose any cause of action known to law or any reasonable ground capable of invoking the Court's jurisdiction and were not in a form capable of being filed. The application was therefore dismissed under O 20 and s 31A of the Federal Court of Australia Act 1976 (Cth).

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
25 June 2008
Procedural Posture
Application for an Order of Review / Application Dismissed
Outcome
Application for an order of review dismissed.
Legal Topics
['rejection of Documents for Filing' 'abuse of Process' 'frivolous and Vexatious Proceedings' 'summary Dismissal' 'no Reasonable Cause of Action']
['federal Civil Procedure' 'administrative Law'] ['rejection of Documents for Filing' 'abuse of Process' 'frivolous and Vexatious Proceedings' 'summary Dismissal' 'no Reasonable Cause of Action']

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 an Order of Review / Application Dismissed

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether the Registrar's rejection of the applicant's proposed application and affidavit following a direction under O 46 r 7A(2) should be reviewed." 'Whether the proposed application disclosed a cause of action or any reasonable ground capable of invoking the jurisdiction of the Court.' 'Whether the Australian Federal Government was a proper respondent.' 'Whether the application for an order of review was bound to fail and should be dismissed under O 20 and s 31A of the Federal Court of Australia Act 1976 (Cth).']

Ratio Decidendi

The application for an order of review was bound to fail because the matter had not been served, there was no proper respondent, and the underlying proposed application and affidavit did not disclose any cause of action known to law or any reasonable ground capable of invoking the Court's jurisdiction and were not in a form capable of being filed. The application was therefore dismissed under O 20 and s 31A of the Federal Court of Australia Act 1976 (Cth).

Court Disposition

Application for an order of review dismissed.

Orders

  • ['The application for an order of review be dismissed.']