Fuller, Donald v Minister for Primary Industries & Energy [1997] FCA 1138

Fuller, Donald v Minister for Primary Industries & Energy [1997] FCA 1138

Leave to appeal was refused because the primary judge's refusal to extend time was not attended with sufficient doubt and was plainly correct. The applicant's delay resulted from his own choice to proceed through the Defence Coalition rather than personally, he had not identified succinct or clear grounds for judicial review as distinct from merits objections, and his submissions concerned the scientific merits of the rabbit calicivirus programme. In light of pending merits review proceedings and the absence of proper judicial review grounds, an extension of time would be futile and no substantial injustice would result.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
29 October 1997
Procedural Posture
Application for Leave to Appeal From Refusal to Grant an Extension of Time to Commence Proceedings Under the Administrative Decisions (judicial Review) Act 1977 / Leave to Appeal From Interlocutory Judgment
Outcome
Leave to appeal refused with costs.
Legal Topics
['judicial Review' 'extension of Time' 'leave to Appeal' 'interlocutory Judgment' 'merits Review' 'standing' 'biological Control of Rabbits' 'rabbit Calicivirus']
['administrative Law'] ['judicial Review' 'extension of Time' 'leave to Appeal' 'interlocutory Judgment' 'merits Review' 'standing' 'biological Control of Rabbits' 'rabbit Calicivirus']

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 1 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Procedural Posture

Application for Leave to Appeal From Refusal to Grant an Extension of Time to Commence Proceedings Under the Administrative Decisions (judicial Review) Act 1977 / Leave to Appeal From Interlocutory Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether leave should be granted to appeal from the refusal of an extension of time to apply for judicial review under the Administrative Decisions (Judicial Review) Act 1977.' "Whether the primary judge's refusal of an extension of time was attended with sufficient doubt to warrant consideration by a Full Court." "Whether refusal of leave would work substantial injustice if the primary judge's decision were wrong." 'Whether the proposed proceeding identified grounds for judicial review as distinct from a challenge to the scientific merits of the decisions.' 'Whether the existence of pending Administrative Appeals Tribunal merits review proceedings made an extension of time futile or inappropriate.']

Ratio Decidendi

Leave to appeal was refused because the primary judge's refusal to extend time was not attended with sufficient doubt and was plainly correct. The applicant's delay resulted from his own choice to proceed through the Defence Coalition rather than personally, he had not identified succinct or clear grounds for judicial review as distinct from merits objections, and his submissions concerned the scientific merits of the rabbit calicivirus programme. In light of pending merits review proceedings and the absence of proper judicial review grounds, an extension of time would be futile and no substantial injustice would result.

Court Disposition

Leave to appeal refused with costs.

Orders

  • ['Leave to appeal be refused with costs.']