Croker v Deputy Registrar of the High Court of Australia [2003] FCA 34

Croker v Deputy Registrar of the High Court of Australia [2003] FCA 34

No ground of review under the AD(JR) Act was made out, as there was no demonstration of denial of procedural fairness, jurisdictional error, failure to comply with law, or improper exercise of power by the Deputy Registrar. Even if there were an available ground, the applicant had an available remedy in the High...

Source-derived case information.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
03 February 2003
Procedural Posture
Application for Judicial Review / Final Judgment
Outcome
Application dismissed
Legal Topics
['judicial Review of Administrative Conduct' 'decision of Deputy Registrar – High Court' 'deemed Abandonment Under Court Rules' 'jurisdiction Under Ad(jr) Act and Judiciary Act']
['administrative Law'] ['judicial Review of Administrative Conduct' 'decision of Deputy Registrar – High Court' 'deemed Abandonment Under Court Rules' 'jurisdiction Under Ad(jr) Act and Judiciary Act']

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

Procedural Posture

Application for Judicial Review / Final Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the conduct of the Deputy Registrar of the High Court was administrative and reviewable under the Administrative Decisions (Judicial Review) Act 1977 (Cth)' 'Whether any ground for review under s 5 of the AD(JR) Act was made out' 'Whether the deemed abandonment under High Court Rules was lawfully effected' 'Whether Federal Court can grant the relief sought against a Deputy Registrar of the High Court under s 39B of the Judiciary Act 1903 (Cth)']

Ratio Decidendi

No ground of review under the AD(JR) Act was made out, as there was no demonstration of denial of procedural fairness, jurisdictional error, failure to comply with law, or improper exercise of power by the Deputy Registrar. Even if there were an available ground, the applicant had an available remedy in the High Court and declined to pursue it; thus, the Court exercised its discretion to refuse relief.

Court Disposition

Application dismissed

Orders

  • ['The application be dismissed.' "The applicant pay the respondents' costs." 'The second respondent be granted liberty to relist the matter within 7 days to vary the costs order.' 'Order for costs not to be entered for a period of 7 days from the date of judgment.']