Patton, B.W. v. The Honourable Kim Beazley [1987] FCA 172

Patton, B.W. v. The Honourable Kim Beazley [1987] FCA 172

A single judge of the Federal Court has jurisdiction under 0.37, r.10 and s.23 to grant a stay of a Full Court order pending special leave application, but in the absence of risk that the costs cannot be repaid or other special circumstances, the application for a stay must be dismissed.

Source-derived case information.

Parties
Applicant: Brian William Patton; Respondents: The Honourable Kim Christian Beazley, Minister of State for Defence and the Commonwealth of Australia
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
24 March 1987
Procedural Posture
Application for Stay of Costs Order / Decision on Notice of Motion for Stay Pending Special Leave Application
Outcome
Application (notice of motion) dismissed with costs
Legal Topics
Jurisdiction to Stay Costs Order, Interlocutory Applications, Special Leave to Appeal
Practice and Procedure Jurisdiction to Stay Costs Order Interlocutory Applications Special Leave to Appeal

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 2 Authorities cited 10 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Brian William Patton

Applicant

The Honourable Kim Christian Beazley, Minister of State for Defence and the Commonwealth of Australia

Respondents

Procedural Posture

Application for Stay of Costs Order / Decision on Notice of Motion for Stay Pending Special Leave Application

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Does a single judge of the Federal Court have jurisdiction to stay execution of a Full Court order for costs pending a special leave application to the High Court?

Ratio Decidendi

A single judge of the Federal Court has jurisdiction under 0.37, r.10 and s.23 to grant a stay of a Full Court order pending special leave application, but in the absence of risk that the costs cannot be repaid or other special circumstances, the application for a stay must be dismissed.

Court Disposition

Application (notice of motion) dismissed with costs

Orders

  • The notice of motion be dismissed
  • The applicant pay the respondents' costs of and incidental to the notice of motion to be taxed