Collier v Lancer [2013] NSWCA 14

Collier v Lancer [2013] NSWCA 14

The notice of motion was dismissed because the applicant identified no proper basis for compelling Superintendent Fesczuck's attendance, no basis for an interim injunction or prohibition against the Local Court or Magistrate Stevenson, and the requested production of Local Court paperwork had no relevance to whether Adams J erred in making the orders under challenge. The issue about the identity of the first respondent could be dealt with on the application for leave to appeal.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
06 February 2013
Procedural Posture
Application for Leave to Appeal; Notice of Motion / Procedural Ruling in the Court of Appeal
Outcome
Notice of motion dismissed with costs; hearing of application for leave to appeal expedited.
Legal Topics
['notice of Motion' 'leave to Appeal' 'interim Injunction' 'apprehended Bias' 'subpoena' 'prohibition' 'production of Documents' 'costs']
['practice and Procedure'] ['notice of Motion' 'leave to Appeal' 'interim Injunction' 'apprehended Bias' 'subpoena' 'prohibition' 'production of Documents' 'costs']

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 1 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Procedural Posture

Application for Leave to Appeal; Notice of Motion / Procedural Ruling in the Court of Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether an ex parte interim injunction should issue against the Local Court of New South Wales and Magistrate Stevenson.' 'Whether Constable Kate Lancer should be replaced by the Commissioner of Police as the first respondent.' 'Whether Superintendent Zenio Fesczuck should be required to attend to give oral evidence.' 'Whether Magistrate Stevenson should be prohibited from further participation in proceedings involving the applicant.' 'Whether the Local Court should be directed to produce paperwork relating to an apprehended violence order application.' 'Whether the notice of motion should be dismissed with costs.']

Ratio Decidendi

The notice of motion was dismissed because the applicant identified no proper basis for compelling Superintendent Fesczuck's attendance, no basis for an interim injunction or prohibition against the Local Court or Magistrate Stevenson, and the requested production of Local Court paperwork had no relevance to whether Adams J erred in making the orders under challenge. The issue about the identity of the first respondent could be dealt with on the application for leave to appeal.

Court Disposition

Notice of motion dismissed with costs; hearing of application for leave to appeal expedited.

Orders

  • ['Notice of motion filed 29 January 2013 dismissed with costs.' "Expedite the hearing of the application for leave to appeal to a date in March to be arranged in consultation with the Registrar. On that date, if there be any application to review the Court's decision, that application for review may be listed with...