Cameron, P.A. v. Gesling, C. & Ors [1987] FCA 92

Cameron, P.A. v. Gesling, C. & Ors [1987] FCA 92

The applicant failed to provide a satisfactory explanation for the substantial delay in instituting proceedings under the Judicial Review Act, and the substantive application did not raise serious questions warranting the grant of an extension of time.

Parties
Applicant: Patricia Ann Cameron; First Respondent: Clive Gesling; First Respondent: Joan Clare Hughes; First Respondent: Leslie Norman Blackley; Second Respondent: Robert Norman Allen; Third Respondent: Stephanie Chapman
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
04 March 1987
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review Application / Application for Extension of Time and Orders of Review
Outcome
Application dismissed
Legal Topics
Judicial Review, Extension of Time, Natural Justice, Promotion Appeals in Commonwealth Teaching Service
Administrative Law Judicial Review Extension of Time Natural Justice Promotion Appeals in Commonwealth Teaching Service

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 2 Authorities cited 16 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Patricia Ann Cameron

Applicant

Clive Gesling

First Respondent

Joan Clare Hughes

First Respondent

Leslie Norman Blackley

First Respondent

Robert Norman Allen

Second Respondent

Stephanie Chapman

Third Respondent

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review Application / Application for Extension of Time and Orders of Review

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether an extension of time to bring proceedings under the Administrative Decisions (Judicial Review) Act 1977 (Cth) should be granted
  2. 2 Whether the applicant's explanation of delay was satisfactory
  3. 3 Whether the substantive application raised serious questions for determination

Ratio Decidendi

The applicant failed to provide a satisfactory explanation for the substantial delay in instituting proceedings under the Judicial Review Act, and the substantive application did not raise serious questions warranting the grant of an extension of time.

Court Disposition

Application dismissed

Orders

  • The applicant's motion notice of 9 October 1986 is dismissed.
  • The application for orders of review filed on 18 August 1986 is dismissed.