Tervonen v Minister for Home Affairs (No 2) [2008] FCA 872

Tervonen v Minister for Home Affairs (No 2) [2008] FCA 872

Leave to discontinue was granted because the Minister assured the Court that no reliance would be placed on the 11 November 2007 notice and the parties accepted there was no utility in further pursuing the proceedings. The leave was conditioned to protect finality by requiring prior leave before any further proceedings to review that notice. No order as to costs was made because, although the Applicant achieved practical success by obtaining the Minister's assurance, the proceedings ended without a merits hearing, the Minister was denied the opportunity to vindicate his position, and the Court's preliminary assessment was that the Applicant would likely have failed on the discovery motion.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
12 June 2008
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review of a Notice Issued Under S 16 of the Extradition Act 1988 (cth) / Application for Leave to Discontinue Proceedings and Determination of Costs After a Motion for Discovery
Outcome
Leave granted to the Applicant to discontinue the proceedings, subject to a condition; no order as to costs.
Legal Topics
['leave to Discontinue Proceedings' 'no Order as to Costs' 'discovery in Judicial Review Proceedings' 'revocation or Purported Revocation of an Extradition Notice' 'federal Court Costs Discretion']
['practice and Procedure' 'costs' 'extradition' 'judicial Review'] ['leave to Discontinue Proceedings' 'no Order as to Costs' 'discovery in Judicial Review Proceedings' 'revocation or Purported Revocation of an Extradition Notice' 'federal Court Costs Discretion']

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

Judicial Review of a Notice Issued Under S 16 of the Extradition Act 1988 (cth) / Application for Leave to Discontinue Proceedings and Determination of Costs After a Motion for Discovery

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether leave should be given to the Applicant to discontinue the proceedings reviewing the notice issued under s 16 of the Extradition Act 1988 (Cth) on 11 November 2007.' 'Whether the discontinuance should be subject to a condition preventing further proceedings about the 11 November 2007 notice without prior leave of the Court.' 'Whether any order for costs should be made in favour of the Applicant or the Minister.' "Whether the Court could take into account its preliminary assessment of the Applicant's prospects on the motion for discovery when determining costs."]

Ratio Decidendi

Leave to discontinue was granted because the Minister assured the Court that no reliance would be placed on the 11 November 2007 notice and the parties accepted there was no utility in further pursuing the proceedings. The leave was conditioned to protect finality by requiring prior leave before any further proceedings to review that notice. No order as to costs was made because, although the Applicant achieved practical success by obtaining the Minister's assurance, the proceedings ended without a merits hearing, the Minister was denied the opportunity to vindicate his position, and the Court's preliminary assessment was that the Applicant would likely have failed on the discovery motion.

Court Disposition

Leave granted to the Applicant to discontinue the proceedings, subject to a condition; no order as to costs.

Orders

  • ['Notes the assurance of the First Respondent that no reliance is to be placed upon the notice issued under s 16(1) of the Extradition Act 1988 (Cth) on 11 November 2007.' 'Subject to Order 2, leave be given to the Applicant to discontinue the proceedings.' 'Without the prior leave of the Court, no proceedings are...