Sayed v National Disability Insurance Agency [2023] FCA 1550

Sayed v National Disability Insurance Agency [2023] FCA 1550

Leave to appeal was refused because the audio recording was sought for the recusal application, that application had been dismissed and all appellate challenges exhausted, and the Applicant identified no real benefit unconnected to the recusal application. The application therefore lacked utility, no substantial injustice would result if leave were refused, and the primary decision was not attended by sufficient doubt to warrant reconsideration. Referral to a Full Court was also refused because the issue was a relatively minor interlocutory issue, was not novel or of general importance, and the leave application was inutile.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
07 December 2023
Procedural Posture
Application for Leave to Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal From Interlocutory Orders Refusing Access to an Audio Recording; Application for Referral to a Full Court
Outcome
The application for leave to appeal and the application for referral to a Full Court were refused; the Applicant was ordered to pay the First Respondent's costs.
Legal Topics
['leave to Appeal' 'interlocutory Orders' 'access to Audio Recording of Hearing' 'recusal Application' 'referral to Full Court' 'costs']
['practice and Procedure' 'administrative Law'] ['leave to Appeal' 'interlocutory Orders' 'access to Audio Recording of Hearing' 'recusal Application' 'referral to Full Court' '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

Application for Leave to Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal From Interlocutory Orders Refusing Access to an Audio Recording; Application for Referral to a Full Court

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether leave should be granted to appeal from orders refusing the Applicant access to an audio recording of a case management hearing.' 'Whether the application for leave to appeal lacked utility because the related recusal application had been dismissed and appellate challenges exhausted.' "Whether the primary judge's decision was attended with sufficient doubt and whether substantial injustice would result if leave were refused." 'Whether the application for leave to appeal should be heard by a Full Court.']

Ratio Decidendi

Leave to appeal was refused because the audio recording was sought for the recusal application, that application had been dismissed and all appellate challenges exhausted, and the Applicant identified no real benefit unconnected to the recusal application. The application therefore lacked utility, no substantial injustice would result if leave were refused, and the primary decision was not attended by sufficient doubt to warrant reconsideration. Referral to a Full Court was also refused because the issue was a relatively minor interlocutory issue, was not novel or of general importance, and the leave application was inutile.

Court Disposition

The application for leave to appeal and the application for referral to a Full Court were refused; the Applicant was ordered to pay the First Respondent's costs.

Orders

  • ["The Applicant's application for leave to appeal and his application that the application for leave to appeal be referred to a Full Court be refused." "The Applicant pay the First Respondent's costs of the appeal, to be fixed by way of an agreed lump sum or, in default of agreement, by way of a lump sum fixed by a...