Croker v Philips Electronics Australia Limited [2003] FCAFC 43

Croker v Philips Electronics Australia Limited [2003] FCAFC 43

The Judge's direction to the Registrar under O 46 r 7A of the Federal Court Rules was not a judgment. Because there was no judgment from which leave to appeal could be sought, the application was incompetent and had to be dismissed with costs.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
13 March 2003
Procedural Posture
Application for Leave to Appeal From a Judge of the Federal Court of Australia / Application for Leave to Appeal Dismissed
Outcome
Application dismissed with costs payable by the applicant to the third respondent.
Legal Topics
['application for Leave to Appeal' 'interlocutory Judgment' 'whether a Direction to the Registrar Under O 46 R 7 a of the Federal Court Rules Constitutes a Judgment' 'abuse of Process' 'vexatious or Frivolous Conduct']
['practice and Procedure' 'appellate Procedure'] ['application for Leave to Appeal' 'interlocutory Judgment' 'whether a Direction to the Registrar Under O 46 R 7 a of the Federal Court Rules Constitutes a Judgment' 'abuse of Process' 'vexatious or Frivolous Conduct']

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
Sign in to unlock

Procedural Posture

Application for Leave to Appeal From a Judge of the Federal Court of Australia / Application for Leave to Appeal Dismissed

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the application was in respect of a judgment for the purposes of leave to appeal.' 'Whether a direction by a Judge to the Registrar pursuant to O 46 r 7A of the Federal Court Rules constitutes a judgment.']

Ratio Decidendi

The Judge's direction to the Registrar under O 46 r 7A of the Federal Court Rules was not a judgment. Because there was no judgment from which leave to appeal could be sought, the application was incompetent and had to be dismissed with costs.

Court Disposition

Application dismissed with costs payable by the applicant to the third respondent.

Orders

  • ['The application be dismissed.' "The applicant pay the third respondent's costs."]