Director-General of Social Services v Rosemary Chaney [1980] FCA 83
In the interim period, the court should give effect to the intended remedial power of the amended statute by making an order that results in the payment of the pension pending determination of the appeal, as proper exercise of the interim power under sub-s.44A(2).
- Parties
- Appellant: Director-General of Social Services; Respondent: Rosemary Chaney
- Jurisdiction
- Australia
- Judgment Date
- 04 June 1980
- Procedural Posture
- Appeal / Interlocutory Application Pending Full Court Appeal
- Outcome
- interlocutory order granted
- Legal Topics
- Interim Orders, Stay of Administrative Decisions, Implementation of Social Security Entitlements
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Director-General of Social Services
Appellant
Rosemary Chaney
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Interlocutory Application Pending Full Court Appeal
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the court has power to make interim orders affecting payment of pension pending appeal of tribunal decision
- 2 Interpretation of 'order staying or otherwise affecting the operation or implementation of the decision' under Administrative Appeals Tribunal Act and Social Services Act
Ratio Decidendi
In the interim period, the court should give effect to the intended remedial power of the amended statute by making an order that results in the payment of the pension pending determination of the appeal, as proper exercise of the interim power under sub-s.44A(2).
Court Disposition
interlocutory order granted
Orders
- The order of Davies J. is to operate so that payment of pension is directed from today until hearing or further order.
- Liberty to apply is reserved to any party.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment