Ferella v Official Trustee In Bankruptcy (No 2) [2014] FCA 508

Ferella v Official Trustee In Bankruptcy (No 2) [2014] FCA 508

Although the applicants were eleven days late and the explanation for delay was accepted, the application for leave to appeal had no prospect of success because nothing suggested that the primary judge's discretion miscarried. There was no suggested factual error, no credible criticism of the reasons for refusing the adjournment, the evidence of Mr Ferella's injury did not undermine the conclusion that the case could have been prepared had the applicants chosen to fund the litigation, and no submissions supported the proposed grounds of appeal. The extension of time application was therefore dismissed with costs.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
22 May 2014
Procedural Posture
Application for an Extension of Time to Seek Leave to Appeal From an Interlocutory Decision Refusing an Adjournment / Application Dismissed After Hearing
Outcome
Application for an extension of time to seek leave to appeal dismissed with costs.
Legal Topics
['extension of Time' 'leave to Appeal' 'interlocutory Decision' 'adjournment' 'case Management' 'procedural Fairness']
['practice and Procedure' 'appellate Procedure'] ['extension of Time' 'leave to Appeal' 'interlocutory Decision' 'adjournment' 'case Management' 'procedural Fairness']

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 an Extension of Time to Seek Leave to Appeal From an Interlocutory Decision Refusing an Adjournment / Application Dismissed After Hearing

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the applicants should receive an extension of time to seek leave to appeal from the refusal to vacate the final hearing.' "Whether the proposed appeal had sufficient prospects of success, including whether the primary judge's discretion to refuse an adjournment miscarried." 'Whether the applicants had been given a proper opportunity to present their case despite loss of legal representation shortly before the final hearing.']

Ratio Decidendi

Although the applicants were eleven days late and the explanation for delay was accepted, the application for leave to appeal had no prospect of success because nothing suggested that the primary judge's discretion miscarried. There was no suggested factual error, no credible criticism of the reasons for refusing the adjournment, the evidence of Mr Ferella's injury did not undermine the conclusion that the case could have been prepared had the applicants chosen to fund the litigation, and no submissions supported the proposed grounds of appeal. The extension of time application was therefore dismissed with costs.

Court Disposition

Application for an extension of time to seek leave to appeal dismissed with costs.

Orders

  • ['The application for an extension of time to seek leave to appeal filed 27 December 2013 be dismissed.' "The applicants pay the respondent's costs."]