Gluyas v Human Rights & Equal Opportunity Commission [2001] FCA 1322

Gluyas v Human Rights & Equal Opportunity Commission [2001] FCA 1322

Each application for extension of time was refused due to significant and inadequately explained delays in making the applications, the prejudice to respondents from such delays, and the lack of compelling merit in the underlying claims, leading to the dismissal of the substantive applications.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
25 September 2001
Procedural Posture
Application for Judicial Review / Judgment on Applications for Extension of Time and Substantive Applications
Outcome
Applications for extension of time refused; substantive applications dismissed; no order as to costs.
Legal Topics
['judicial Review' 'extension of Time' 'discretionary Relief' 'procedural Fairness' 'delay and Prejudice']
['administrative Law'] ['judicial Review' 'extension of Time' 'discretionary Relief' 'procedural Fairness' 'delay and Prejudice']

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 Judicial Review / Judgment on Applications for Extension of Time and Substantive Applications

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the applicant should be granted an extension of time to apply for orders of review of HREOC decisions' 'Whether the delay in making the applications should be excused in the circumstances' 'Whether the decisions of HREOC constitute contraventions of the Administrative Decisions (Judicial Review) Act 1977']

Ratio Decidendi

Each application for extension of time was refused due to significant and inadequately explained delays in making the applications, the prejudice to respondents from such delays, and the lack of compelling merit in the underlying claims, leading to the dismissal of the substantive applications.

Court Disposition

Applications for extension of time refused; substantive applications dismissed; no order as to costs.

Orders

  • ['The application for an extension of time be refused (V361 of 2000 and V362 of 2000).' 'The application be dismissed (V361 of 2000 and V362 of 2000).' 'There be no order as to the costs of the application (V361 of 2000 and V362 of 2000).']