Hells Angels Motorcycle Club Incorporated v Duffy, Attorney-General [1991] FCA 944

Hells Angels Motorcycle Club Incorporated v Duffy, Attorney-General [1991] FCA 944

Although VG No. 305 of 1991 raised important issues sufficient to justify a Full Court hearing if otherwise appropriate, the Court declined to exercise the discretion at this stage because hearing it urgently with the expedited appeal would likely require substantially more time than allocated, risk inadequate consideration of complex matters, and risk defeating the purpose of the expedited appeal; further, the apprehended ministerial declaration had not been made.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
18 November 1991
Procedural Posture
Interlocutory Application in Federal Court Proceeding VG No. 305 of 1991 / Application for an Order Under S.20(1)(a) of the Federal Court Act 1976 That the Matter Be Heard by a Full Court and for the Matter to Be Heard With Expedited Appeal VG No. 302 of 1991
Outcome
Both applications in the notice of motion were dismissed; costs were reserved; VG No. 305 of 1991 was adjourned for directions.
Legal Topics
['full Court Hearing' 'discretion Under S.20(1)(a)' 'practicability of Concurrent Hearing' 'expedited Appeal' 'costs Reserved']
['federal Court Procedure' 'administrative Law' 'migration'] ['full Court Hearing' 'discretion Under S.20(1)(a)' 'practicability of Concurrent Hearing' 'expedited Appeal' 'costs Reserved']

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

Interlocutory Application in Federal Court Proceeding VG No. 305 of 1991 / Application for an Order Under S.20(1)(a) of the Federal Court Act 1976 That the Matter Be Heard by a Full Court and for the Matter to Be Heard With Expedited Appeal VG No. 302 of 1991

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the Court should exercise the discretion under s.20(1)(a) of the Federal Court Act 1976 to order that VG No. 305 of 1991 be heard by a Full Court.' 'Whether VG No. 305 of 1991 should be heard at the same time and before the same justices as the expedited appeal in VG No. 302 of 1991.']

Ratio Decidendi

Although VG No. 305 of 1991 raised important issues sufficient to justify a Full Court hearing if otherwise appropriate, the Court declined to exercise the discretion at this stage because hearing it urgently with the expedited appeal would likely require substantially more time than allocated, risk inadequate consideration of complex matters, and risk defeating the purpose of the expedited appeal; further, the apprehended ministerial declaration had not been made.

Court Disposition

Both applications in the notice of motion were dismissed; costs were reserved; VG No. 305 of 1991 was adjourned for directions.

Orders

  • ['The first application in the notice of motion is dismissed.' 'The second application in the notice of motion is dismissed.' 'The costs of the application are reserved.' 'The application in VG No. 305 of 1991 is adjourned until 10.00 a.m. on Monday, 25 November in Melbourne for directions.']