Simpson, D.R. & Anor v Guthrie, G.S & Anor [1986] FCA 644

Simpson, D.R. & Anor v Guthrie, G.S & Anor [1986] FCA 644

The application for enlargement of time was refused because it was made years after the prescribed time, the applicant's explanation did not justify the delay, relevant authorities and persons were entitled to proceed on the basis that no judicial review application would be made, the appointments made in 1983 had substantially run their course, effective judicial review relief would be unreal and prejudicial to persons not before the Court, and the proposed case appeared to have no merit. The s.39B relief could not stand as pleaded within the dismissed application and was struck out.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
12 May 1986
Procedural Posture
Application Under the Administrative Decisions (judicial Review) Act 1977 With Relief Also Sought Under S.39 B of the Judiciary Act 1903 / Respondents' Motion to Dismiss and Applicant's Application for Enlargement of Time / Orders to Show Cause
Outcome
Application for enlargement of time refused; Judicial Review Act application dismissed; s.39B relief struck out, with costs.
Legal Topics
['extension of Time' 'administrative Decisions (judicial Review) Act 1977' 'prerogative Writs' 'natural Justice' 'bias' 'relevant and Irrelevant Considerations' 'public Service Board Appointment Process']
['administrative Law' 'judicial Review' 'federal Court Procedure' 'public Service Employment'] ['extension of Time' 'administrative Decisions (judicial Review) Act 1977' 'prerogative Writs' 'natural Justice' 'bias' 'relevant and Irrelevant Considerations' 'public Service Board Appointment Process']

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 Under the Administrative Decisions (judicial Review) Act 1977 With Relief Also Sought Under S.39 B of the Judiciary Act 1903 / Respondents' Motion to Dismiss and Applicant's Application for Enlargement of Time / Orders to Show Cause

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the application under the Administrative Decisions (Judicial Review) Act 1977 should be dismissed because it was made out of time and no leave had been granted.' 'Whether time should be enlarged for the applicant to challenge the decision not to recommend his reappointment as a Lecturer at the International Training Institute from 1 January 1983.' 'Whether relief sought under s.39B of the Judiciary Act 1903 could stand in the statement of claim.' 'Whether the applicant had any arguable basis based on assurances, contract or estoppel arising from statements by Mr Heron or Dr McLaren.' 'Whether prerogative writ relief should proceed despite procedural defects and delay.']

Ratio Decidendi

The application for enlargement of time was refused because it was made years after the prescribed time, the applicant's explanation did not justify the delay, relevant authorities and persons were entitled to proceed on the basis that no judicial review application would be made, the appointments made in 1983 had substantially run their course, effective judicial review relief would be unreal and prejudicial to persons not before the Court, and the proposed case appeared to have no merit. The s.39B relief could not stand as pleaded within the dismissed application and was struck out.

Court Disposition

Application for enlargement of time refused; Judicial Review Act application dismissed; s.39B relief struck out, with costs.

Orders

  • ['The relief sought under s.39B of the Judiciary Act 1903 be struck out from the statement of claim, with costs.' 'The application for an order of review be dismissed, with costs.']