Michael Wilson & Partners Ltd v Porter (No 4) [2024] FCA 163

Michael Wilson & Partners Ltd v Porter (No 4) [2024] FCA 163

The applicant did not file a proper application for review within the prescribed period and failed to furnish a satisfactory explanation for the delay. No grounds or arguable case for a different assessment of costs were articulated. Prejudice would arise from further delay, and there is a strong public interest in finality. Consequently, the application for extension of time must be refused.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
28 February 2024
Procedural Posture
Interlocutory Application / Application for Extension of Time to Review Registrar's Order
Outcome
Application for extension of time dismissed with costs.
Legal Topics
['extension of Time' "review of Registrar's Decision" 'costs Assessment' 'lump Sum Costs']
['civil Procedure' 'insolvency' 'costs'] ['extension of Time' "review of Registrar's Decision" 'costs Assessment' 'lump Sum 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 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Procedural Posture

Interlocutory Application / Application for Extension of Time to Review Registrar's Order

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether the applicant should be granted an extension of time to apply for review of the registrar's order fixing lump sum costs" 'Whether an arguable case exists for a different assessment of costs' 'Whether procedural or substantive prejudice would result from an extension']

Ratio Decidendi

The applicant did not file a proper application for review within the prescribed period and failed to furnish a satisfactory explanation for the delay. No grounds or arguable case for a different assessment of costs were articulated. Prejudice would arise from further delay, and there is a strong public interest in finality. Consequently, the application for extension of time must be refused.

Court Disposition

Application for extension of time dismissed with costs.

Orders

  • ['The interlocutory application dated 3 April 2023 for an extension of time in which to apply to review the order of Registrar Segal of 27 January 2023 is dismissed.' 'The applicant do pay the costs of the first and second respondents of and incidental to the interlocutory application.' 'The costs pursuant to order...