Vel, Peter v The Human Rights & Equal Opportunity Commission & Anor [1997] FCA 1145

Vel, Peter v The Human Rights & Equal Opportunity Commission & Anor [1997] FCA 1145

Given the explained delay but overwhelming prejudice to the Commonwealth caused by passage of time, and absence of clear prospects of success in appeal, it was not fair and equitable to grant leave or extension of time; no relevant considerations were overlooked or irrelevant ones considered in prior exercise of discretion.

Parties
Applicant: Peter Vel; First Respondent: The Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Commission; Second Respondent: Commonwealth of Australia
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
31 October 1997
Procedural Posture
Application for Leave to Appeal From Interlocutory Judgment / Leave to Appeal From Order Refusing Extension of Time
Outcome
Application for leave to appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Leave to Appeal, Extension of Time, Discretionary Power, Prejudice, Judicial Review
Practice and Procedure Administrative Law Leave to Appeal Extension of Time Discretionary Power Prejudice Judicial Review

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 3 Authorities cited 17 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Peter Vel

Applicant

The Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Commission

First Respondent

Commonwealth of Australia

Second Respondent

Procedural Posture

Application for Leave to Appeal From Interlocutory Judgment / Leave to Appeal From Order Refusing Extension of Time

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether leave to appeal should be granted from an order refusing extension of time to apply for judicial review
  2. 2 Whether relevant or irrelevant considerations were taken into account in exercising discretion under Administrative Decisions (Judicial Review) Act 1977

Ratio Decidendi

Given the explained delay but overwhelming prejudice to the Commonwealth caused by passage of time, and absence of clear prospects of success in appeal, it was not fair and equitable to grant leave or extension of time; no relevant considerations were overlooked or irrelevant ones considered in prior exercise of discretion.

Court Disposition

Application for leave to appeal dismissed

Orders

  • The applicant's motion is dismissed.
  • No order as to costs.