Pham v Human Rights & Equal Opportunity Commission [2002] FCAFC 353

Leave to appeal from orders dismissing claims against the second and third respondents was required and not warranted; the appeal as against them was incompetent. The appeal against the first respondent (the Commission) failed as no error or bias was established.

Jurisdiction: Australia
Judgment Date: 06 November 2002
Procedural Posture: Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal and Appeal Hearing
Outcome: Appeal dismissed; leave refused as to second and third respondents
Legal Topics: ['unlawful Discrimination' 'jurisdiction of the Federal Court' 'leave to Appeal' 'summary Dismissal' 'bias']

['administrative Law' 'discrimination Law'] ['unlawful Discrimination' 'jurisdiction of the Federal Court' 'leave to Appeal' 'summary Dismissal' 'bias']

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 2 Amounts and remedies 1

Procedural Posture

Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal and Appeal Hearing

Legal Issues

1 ['Whether leave to appeal from interlocutory orders was required' 'Whether the primary judge erred in dismissing the claims against the respondents' 'Whether the claim of bias against the Commission was established']

Ratio Decidendi

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed; leave refused as to second and third respondents

Orders

['Leave to appeal from the order dismissing the claims against the second and third respondents is refused.' 'The appeal in respect of those claims is dismissed as incompetent.' 'The appeal from the said order dismissing the claim against the first respondent is dismissed.' 'There is no order for costs of the appeal.']