Mascenon, D.S. v. Pomeroy, J. & Anor [1985] FCA 543

Mascenon, D.S. v. Pomeroy, J. & Anor [1985] FCA 543

The Court dismissed the application for answers to interrogatories on the basis they sought information not shown to be relevant to the judicial review grounds pleaded, and/or could have been sought under section 13 of the Administrative Decisions (Judicial Review) Act 1977 (Cth), which was not done. The interests of justice did not require the interrogatories to be answered in the circumstances.

Parties
Applicant: David Soriano Mascenon; First Respondent: John Pomeroy; Second Respondent: Minister for Immigration and Ethnic Affairs
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
24 October 1985
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review Application / Interlocutory Application for Interrogatories
Outcome
Application dismissed
Legal Topics
Judicial Review, Permanent Resident Status, Interrogatories, Exercise of Discretion
Administrative Law Judicial Review Permanent Resident Status Interrogatories Exercise of Discretion

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 5 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

David Soriano Mascenon

Applicant

John Pomeroy

First Respondent

Minister for Immigration and Ethnic Affairs

Second Respondent

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review Application / Interlocutory Application for Interrogatories

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the respondents should be ordered to answer certain interrogatories in judicial review proceedings regarding immigration decisions refusing permanent resident status.

Ratio Decidendi

The Court dismissed the application for answers to interrogatories on the basis they sought information not shown to be relevant to the judicial review grounds pleaded, and/or could have been sought under section 13 of the Administrative Decisions (Judicial Review) Act 1977 (Cth), which was not done. The interests of justice did not require the interrogatories to be answered in the circumstances.

Court Disposition

Application dismissed

Orders

  • The application that the respondents answer certain interrogatories is dismissed.
  • The applicant is to pay the costs of the respondents at and incidental to the application.