Patton, B.W. v Minister of State for Defence & the Commonwealth of Australia [1986] FCA 188
The order appealed from is interlocutory as it does not finally determine substantive rights between the parties but deals with the sufficiency of pleadings and refusal of amendment. Leave to appeal is required and, in its absence, the appeal is incompetent and must be dismissed.
- Parties
- Appellant: Patton; Respondents: The Honourable Kim Christian Beazley, Minister of State for Defence and the Commonwealth of Australia
- Jurisdiction
- Australia
- Judgment Date
- 19 April 1986
- Procedural Posture
- Appeal / Application to Dismiss Appeal as Incompetent
- Outcome
- Appeal dismissed as incompetent
- Legal Topics
- Competency of Appeal, Interlocutory Versus Final Orders, Security for Costs
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Patton
Appellant
The Honourable Kim Christian Beazley, Minister of State for Defence and the Commonwealth of Australia
Respondents
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Application to Dismiss Appeal as Incompetent
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the appeal is competent or interlocutory and thus requires leave
- 2 Whether security for costs should be ordered
Ratio Decidendi
The order appealed from is interlocutory as it does not finally determine substantive rights between the parties but deals with the sufficiency of pleadings and refusal of amendment. Leave to appeal is required and, in its absence, the appeal is incompetent and must be dismissed.
Court Disposition
Appeal dismissed as incompetent
Orders
- The appeal is dismissed as incompetent.
- The respondent is to have costs of and incidental to the motion, to be taxed if not agreed.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment