Dahler v Australian Capital Territory [2015] FCA 1303

Dahler v Australian Capital Territory [2015] FCA 1303

The appeal did not warrant referral to a Full Court because the matters identified by the appellant were insufficient: one primary ground concerned the application, not correctness, of a prior Full Court decision; statutory construction issues arise routinely and the absence of prior Full Court consideration of a provision does not of itself require a Full Court; the critical finding below was factual; and referral would likely cause further delay contrary to the purposes of the Federal Court Act when the matter could be appropriately and fairly dealt with by a single Judge.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
23 November 2015
Procedural Posture
Appeal From the Federal Circuit Court of Australia / Interlocutory Application for the Appeal to Be Heard and Determined by a Full Court
Outcome
The appellant's application for the matter to be heard and determined by a Full Court was dismissed, and costs were reserved.
Legal Topics
['whether Appeal Should Be Heard and Determined by a Full Court' 'general Protections Under the Fair Work Act 2009 (cth)' 'workplace Rights' 'overarching Purpose of Civil Practice and Procedure']
['practice and Procedure' 'fair Work'] ['whether Appeal Should Be Heard and Determined by a Full Court' 'general Protections Under the Fair Work Act 2009 (cth)' 'workplace Rights' 'overarching Purpose of Civil Practice and Procedure']

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

Appeal From the Federal Circuit Court of Australia / Interlocutory Application for the Appeal to Be Heard and Determined by a Full Court

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether the appellant's appeal should be listed for hearing before a Full Court pursuant to s 25(1AA)(b) of the Federal Court of Australia Act 1976 (Cth)." 'Whether the appeal raised issues of novel and general importance or other sufficient reason to justify hearing by a Full Court rather than a single Judge.' 'Whether delay and efficient disposition of proceedings weighed against referral to a Full Court.']

Ratio Decidendi

The appeal did not warrant referral to a Full Court because the matters identified by the appellant were insufficient: one primary ground concerned the application, not correctness, of a prior Full Court decision; statutory construction issues arise routinely and the absence of prior Full Court consideration of a provision does not of itself require a Full Court; the critical finding below was factual; and referral would likely cause further delay contrary to the purposes of the Federal Court Act when the matter could be appropriately and fairly dealt with by a single Judge.

Court Disposition

The appellant's application for the matter to be heard and determined by a Full Court was dismissed, and costs were reserved.

Orders

  • ['On or before 4.00pm on Monday, 21 December 2015, Ms Keys has leave to file an application for leave to appeal from the costs order made against her by the Federal Circuit Court on 30 September 2015.' "The appellant's application for the matter to be heard and determined by a Full Court is dismissed." "The question...