Cory v Registrar of the Federal Court of Australia [2010] FCA 1215

Cory v Registrar of the Federal Court of Australia [2010] FCA 1215

The application failed because prerogative writs could not lie against a Registrar exercising delegated Federal Court authority under s 35A of the Federal Court of Australia Act 1976 (Cth). In any event, the Registrar had power to deal with the adjournment issue arising under s 440A(2) because the delegated power under s 467 included the power to adjourn a winding up application, s 440D did not apply to the winding up application, no breach of natural justice was established, and the alleged legal error was only an attempt to challenge the merits of the Registrar's decision.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
29 October 2010
Procedural Posture
Application Under S 39 B(1 A) of the Judiciary Act 1903 (cth) for Prerogative Writs and Alternative Declaratory Relief Concerning a Registrar's Winding Up Order / Final Hearing and Determination
Outcome
Application dismissed.
Legal Topics
['delegation of Powers to Registrar' 'prerogative Writs of Certiorari and Prohibition' 'winding Up Order' 'adjournment of Winding Up Application During Administration' 'leave to Proceed Against Company Under Administration' 'natural Justice']
['federal Court Procedure' 'corporations' 'judicial Review'] ['delegation of Powers to Registrar' 'prerogative Writs of Certiorari and Prohibition' 'winding Up Order' 'adjournment of Winding Up Application During Administration' 'leave to Proceed Against Company Under Administration' 'natural Justice']

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

Application Under S 39 B(1 A) of the Judiciary Act 1903 (cth) for Prerogative Writs and Alternative Declaratory Relief Concerning a Registrar's Winding Up Order / Final Hearing and Determination

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether prerogative writs of certiorari or prohibition could lie against a Registrar of the Federal Court exercising power under s 35A of the Federal Court of Australia Act 1976 (Cth).' 'Whether the Registrar had power to determine an application for adjournment under s 440A(2) of the Corporations Act 2001 (Cth).' 'Whether leave under s 440D of the Corporations Act 2001 (Cth) was a necessary precondition to the Registrar making a winding up order.' 'Whether alleged defaults concerning ss 440A and 440D amounted to a breach of natural justice.' "Whether the Registrar's refusal to adjourn involved legal error by taking an irrelevant consideration into account or by misapplying s 440A(2)."]

Ratio Decidendi

The application failed because prerogative writs could not lie against a Registrar exercising delegated Federal Court authority under s 35A of the Federal Court of Australia Act 1976 (Cth). In any event, the Registrar had power to deal with the adjournment issue arising under s 440A(2) because the delegated power under s 467 included the power to adjourn a winding up application, s 440D did not apply to the winding up application, no breach of natural justice was established, and the alleged legal error was only an attempt to challenge the merits of the Registrar's decision.

Court Disposition

Application dismissed.

Orders

  • ['The application be dismissed.' "The applicant pay the third respondent's costs of the proceeding, as agreed or taxed."]