Ogawa v Colbeck [2007] FCA 1910

Ogawa v Colbeck [2007] FCA 1910

The application was dismissed because the orders sought to be appealed were interlocutory, the applicant filed only a notice of motion without supporting affidavit, particularised grounds, or draft notice of appeal, and therefore the Court could not be satisfied that the decisions below were attended with sufficient doubt or that substantial injustice would result if leave were refused. The applicant had ample opportunity after the Registry drew the defects to her attention, and a notice of motion for leave to appeal without grounds or supporting documentation was not competent.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
04 December 2007
Procedural Posture
Notice of Motion Seeking Leave to Appeal From Interlocutory Orders of the Federal Magistrates Court / Application for Leave to Appeal
Outcome
Application dismissed
Legal Topics
['leave to Appeal From Interlocutory Orders' 'extension of Time' 'further and Better Particulars' 'adjournment' 'costs']
['administrative Law' 'migration' 'civil Procedure'] ['leave to Appeal From Interlocutory Orders' 'extension of Time' 'further and Better Particulars' 'adjournment' '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

Notice of Motion Seeking Leave to Appeal From Interlocutory Orders of the Federal Magistrates Court / Application for Leave to Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether leave should be granted to appeal from interlocutory orders made by Burnett FM on 17 October 2007 and 14 November 2007.' "Whether the applicant's notice of motion was competent in the absence of supporting affidavit evidence, proposed grounds of appeal, particulars, or draft notice of appeal." 'Whether the applicant had shown that the decisions below were attended with sufficient doubt and that substantial injustice would result if leave to appeal were refused.' "Whether the hearing should be adjourned after the applicant's email stating she was not ready to appear and had not served documents."]

Ratio Decidendi

The application was dismissed because the orders sought to be appealed were interlocutory, the applicant filed only a notice of motion without supporting affidavit, particularised grounds, or draft notice of appeal, and therefore the Court could not be satisfied that the decisions below were attended with sufficient doubt or that substantial injustice would result if leave were refused. The applicant had ample opportunity after the Registry drew the defects to her attention, and a notice of motion for leave to appeal without grounds or supporting documentation was not competent.

Court Disposition

Application dismissed

Orders

  • ['The application commenced by notice of motion filed 19 November 2007 be dismissed.' "The applicant pay the respondents' costs of and incidental to today to be taxed, if not otherwise agreed."]