Shields v Williams [2019] FCA 413

Shields v Williams [2019] FCA 413

Because both parties consented to transfer, transfer was likely to save costs, there were inferred advantages and no relevant disadvantages to either party, and the more ready availability of a jury trial was relevant in a defamation proceeding, it was in the interests of justice under s 5(4)(b)(iii) of the Jurisdiction of Courts (Cross-vesting) Act 1987 (Cth) to transfer the proceeding to the Supreme Court of Queensland.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
22 March 2019
Procedural Posture
Defamation Proceeding; Application for Transfer / Application for Transfer From the Federal Court of Australia to the Supreme Court of Queensland
Outcome
Application granted; proceeding transferred to the Supreme Court of Queensland.
Legal Topics
['cross Vesting' 'transfer of Proceedings' 'interests of Justice' 'consent to Transfer']
['practice and Procedure' 'defamation' 'jurisdiction'] ['cross Vesting' 'transfer of Proceedings' 'interests of Justice' 'consent to Transfer']

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

Defamation Proceeding; Application for Transfer / Application for Transfer From the Federal Court of Australia to the Supreme Court of Queensland

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the defamation proceeding should be transferred from the Federal Court of Australia to the Supreme Court of Queensland under the Jurisdiction of Courts (Cross-vesting) Act 1987 (Cth).' 'Whether it was in the interests of justice to transfer the proceeding where both parties consented and anticipated reduced litigation costs.']

Ratio Decidendi

Because both parties consented to transfer, transfer was likely to save costs, there were inferred advantages and no relevant disadvantages to either party, and the more ready availability of a jury trial was relevant in a defamation proceeding, it was in the interests of justice under s 5(4)(b)(iii) of the Jurisdiction of Courts (Cross-vesting) Act 1987 (Cth) to transfer the proceeding to the Supreme Court of Queensland.

Court Disposition

Application granted; proceeding transferred to the Supreme Court of Queensland.

Orders

  • ['Proceeding QUD53/2019 in this Court be transferred to the Supreme Court of Queensland.' 'Costs of the proceedings up to the date of transfer be costs in the cause.']