Johnston v The Greens NSW [2020] NSWCA 357

Johnston v The Greens NSW [2020] NSWCA 357

Leave to appeal was refused because the substantive appeal had no practical utility after the relevant election had occurred and the applicant did not identify any sufficiently arguable error in the primary judge's construction of The Greens NSW constitution or in the discretionary refusal of relief. The costs appeal also did not warrant leave because the primary judge's treatment of the limited public interest element and the costs positions of the fourth and fifth respondents disclosed no error sufficient to justify appellate intervention.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
24 December 2020
Procedural Posture
Application for Leave to Appeal and Extension of Time / Court of Appeal Application From Orders of the Supreme Court of New South Wales, Equity Division
Outcome
Time to file the summons seeking leave to appeal was extended, but the summons, amended summons, and notice of motion were dismissed; the applicant was ordered to pay the fourth and fifth respondents' costs of the summons and amended summons on the basis that only one set of costs may be recovered.
Legal Topics
['leave to Appeal' 'utility of Appeal' 'party Constitution and Preselection Rules' 'public Interest Costs' 'multiple Sets of Costs' 'extension of Time']
['appeals' 'costs' 'associations and Political Parties' 'election Law'] ['leave to Appeal' 'utility of Appeal' 'party Constitution and Preselection Rules' 'public Interest Costs' 'multiple Sets of Costs' 'extension of Time']

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 and Extension of Time / Court of Appeal Application From Orders of the Supreme Court of New South Wales, Equity Division

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether time should be extended for the applicant to file his summons seeking leave to appeal.' 'Whether leave to appeal should be granted where the substantive dispute concerned a Greens NSW list of nominees for an election already held.' 'Whether any alleged errors in construing The Greens NSW constitution and preselection rules were sufficiently arguable to justify leave.' 'Whether the primary judge arguably erred in making costs orders rather than no order as to costs despite a public interest element.' 'Whether the primary judge arguably erred in allowing costs for the fourth and fifth respondents where their interests were said to overlap with The Greens NSW.']

Ratio Decidendi

Leave to appeal was refused because the substantive appeal had no practical utility after the relevant election had occurred and the applicant did not identify any sufficiently arguable error in the primary judge's construction of The Greens NSW constitution or in the discretionary refusal of relief. The costs appeal also did not warrant leave because the primary judge's treatment of the limited public interest element and the costs positions of the fourth and fifth respondents disclosed no error sufficient to justify appellate intervention.

Court Disposition

Time to file the summons seeking leave to appeal was extended, but the summons, amended summons, and notice of motion were dismissed; the applicant was ordered to pay the fourth and fifth respondents' costs of the summons and amended summons on the basis that only one set of costs may be recovered.

Orders

  • ['Extend the time for the applicant to file his summons seeking leave to appeal to 9 June 2020.' 'Dismiss the summons and amended summons.' 'Dismiss the notice of motion filed 1 December 2020.' "Applicant to pay the fourth and fifth respondents' costs of the summons and amended summons, assessed on the basis that...