Revulge v Secretary, Department of Education [2015] FCA 895

Revulge v Secretary, Department of Education [2015] FCA 895

The appeal was incompetent because it was filed outside the prescribed 28-day time limit and did not state a proper question of law as required; no sufficient evidence was provided to displace statutory presumptions as to service or to justify an adjournment.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
21 August 2015
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Objection to Competency of Appeal
Outcome
Appeal dismissed as incompetent
Legal Topics
['appeal' 'competency of Appeal' 'time Limit for Filing' 'form of Notice of Appeal']
['practice and Procedure'] ['appeal' 'competency of Appeal' 'time Limit for Filing' 'form of Notice of Appeal']

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

Appeal / Objection to Competency of Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the appeal was instituted within the time limit prescribed in s 44(2A) of the Administrative Appeals Tribunal Act 1975 (Cth)' 'Whether the Notice of Appeal stated the precise question or questions of law as required by r 33.12 of the Federal Court Rules 2011']

Ratio Decidendi

The appeal was incompetent because it was filed outside the prescribed 28-day time limit and did not state a proper question of law as required; no sufficient evidence was provided to displace statutory presumptions as to service or to justify an adjournment.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed as incompetent

Orders

  • ["The first respondent's objection to the competency of this appeal, set out by notice dated 9 April 2015, be upheld." 'The appeal be dismissed as incompetent.' "The proceeding be listed at 9:30 am on 11 September 2015 to hear the parties' submissions as to costs."]