Pham v University of Queensland [2002] FCAFC 40; [2002] FCA 203

Pham v University of Queensland [2002] FCAFC 40; [2002] FCA 203

The appeal is dismissed because the trial judge properly exercised discretion under O 32 r 2(1)(c) Federal Court Rules to dismiss the action for non-appearance, with no error of law or fact, and there was no evidence sufficient to require adjournment or support claims of bias or discrimination.

Parties
Appellant: Charles Pham; First Respondent: University of Queensland; Second Respondent: Commonwealth of Australia (Australian Defence Force)
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
01 March 2002
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Post Trial Judgment
Outcome
appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Racial Discrimination, Disability Discrimination, Dismissal for Non Appearance, Judicial Discretion, Bias, Adjournment
Discrimination Law Administrative Law Civil Procedure Racial Discrimination Disability Discrimination Dismissal for Non Appearance Judicial Discretion Bias +1 more

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 4 Authorities cited 6 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Charles Pham

Appellant

University of Queensland

First Respondent

Commonwealth of Australia (Australian Defence Force)

Second Respondent

Procedural Posture

Appeal / Post Trial Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the trial judge erred in exercising discretion to dismiss the proceeding for non-appearance of the appellant under O 32 r 2(1)(c) of the Federal Court Rules.
  2. 2 Whether the trial judge was biased or engaged in unlawful discrimination.
  3. 3 Whether s 46PR Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Commission Act 1986 (Cth) was applied appropriately.

Ratio Decidendi

The appeal is dismissed because the trial judge properly exercised discretion under O 32 r 2(1)(c) Federal Court Rules to dismiss the action for non-appearance, with no error of law or fact, and there was no evidence sufficient to require adjournment or support claims of bias or discrimination.

Court Disposition

appeal dismissed

Orders

  • The appeal be dismissed.
  • The appellant pay each respondent's costs of and incidental to the appeal to be taxed.