Tsecouras v Price [2008] FCA 845

Tsecouras v Price [2008] FCA 845

The appeal was struck out because the stated grounds of appeal disclosed no merit or error in the decision of Lloyd-Jones FM, and the Court was satisfied that the appeal had been instituted for an impermissible purpose: to revisit Supreme Court proceedings and challenge evidence given there, matters outside the proper scope of the Federal Court appeal. This constituted an abuse of process under O 20 r 5 of the Federal Court Rules (Cth).

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
04 June 2008
Procedural Posture
Appeal From the Federal Magistrates Court of Australia / Respondent's Oral Motion to Strike Out the Appellant's Appeal as an Abuse of Process
Outcome
Notice of Appeal and proceedings struck out; appellant ordered to pay the respondent's costs.
Legal Topics
['sequestration Order' 'abuse of Process' 'striking Out Proceedings' 'frivolous or Vexatious Proceedings']
['bankruptcy' 'civil Procedure' 'appeals'] ['sequestration Order' 'abuse of Process' 'striking Out Proceedings' 'frivolous or Vexatious Proceedings']

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

Appeal From the Federal Magistrates Court of Australia / Respondent's Oral Motion to Strike Out the Appellant's Appeal as an Abuse of Process

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether the appellant's notice of appeal from the Federal Magistrates Court should be struck out as an abuse of process pursuant to O 20 r 5 of the Federal Court Rules (Cth)." "Whether the appellant's grounds of appeal disclosed any merit or error in the decision of Lloyd-Jones FM." 'Whether the appeal was being used for an impermissible purpose, namely to revisit Supreme Court proceedings concerning the estate of the late Diane Rosemary Keefe.']

Ratio Decidendi

The appeal was struck out because the stated grounds of appeal disclosed no merit or error in the decision of Lloyd-Jones FM, and the Court was satisfied that the appeal had been instituted for an impermissible purpose: to revisit Supreme Court proceedings and challenge evidence given there, matters outside the proper scope of the Federal Court appeal. This constituted an abuse of process under O 20 r 5 of the Federal Court Rules (Cth).

Court Disposition

Notice of Appeal and proceedings struck out; appellant ordered to pay the respondent's costs.

Orders

  • ['The Notice of Appeal and proceedings NSD 655/2008 be struck out pursuant to O 20 r 5(2) of the Federal Court Rules (Cth).' 'The Appellant pay the costs of the Respondent.']