Kennedy v ADI Ltd [2002] FCA 1603

Kennedy v ADI Ltd [2002] FCA 1603

The application for an extension of time was dismissed because the applicant gave no special or acceptable reason for a delay exceeding sixteen months, and the proposed appeal had negligible prospects of success because the proposed grounds did not identify error in the primary judge's reasoning or order but sought to re-agitate evidentiary matters and raise issues not bearing on appellate error.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
19 December 2002
Procedural Posture
Application for Extension of Time to File and Serve a Notice of Appeal / Application Dismissed
Outcome
Application dismissed with costs.
Legal Topics
['extension of Time to Appeal' 'special Reasons for Leave to Appeal Out of Time' 'prospects of Success on Appeal' 'sex Discrimination and Sexual Harassment']
['practice and Procedure' 'discrimination Law'] ['extension of Time to Appeal' 'special Reasons for Leave to Appeal Out of Time' 'prospects of Success on Appeal' 'sex Discrimination and Sexual Harassment']

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 Extension of Time to File and Serve a Notice of Appeal / Application Dismissed

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether special reasons existed under O52 r 15(2) of the Federal Court Rules to grant leave to file and serve a notice of appeal out of time.' 'Whether the applicant provided an acceptable explanation for the delay in filing and serving a notice of appeal.' 'Whether the proposed appeal had sufficient prospects of success to justify an extension of time.']

Ratio Decidendi

The application for an extension of time was dismissed because the applicant gave no special or acceptable reason for a delay exceeding sixteen months, and the proposed appeal had negligible prospects of success because the proposed grounds did not identify error in the primary judge's reasoning or order but sought to re-agitate evidentiary matters and raise issues not bearing on appellate error.

Court Disposition

Application dismissed with costs.

Orders

  • ['The application be dismissed.' "The applicant pay the respondent's costs of the application."]