Ward, Ben & Ors v State of Western Australia & Ors [1997] FCA 366

Ward, Ben & Ors v State of Western Australia & Ors [1997] FCA 366

The interlocutory orders restricting representation and access to evidence on gender grounds are attended with sufficient doubt and potential for substantial injustice to warrant reconsideration by a Full Court; leave to appeal should be granted.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
14 May 1997
Procedural Posture
Interlocutory Application / Application for Leave to Appeal
Outcome
leave to appeal granted
Legal Topics
['practice and Procedure' 'appeals' 'interlocutory Orders' 'gender Restricted Evidence' 'court Powers']
['native Title' 'civil Procedure' 'constitutional Law'] ['practice and Procedure' 'appeals' 'interlocutory Orders' 'gender Restricted Evidence' 'court Powers']

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

Interlocutory Application / Application for Leave to Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether leave should be granted to appeal interlocutory orders restricting party representation and access to gender restricted evidence' 'Whether the Federal Court has power under current legislation to make orders restricting representation and access to evidence based on gender' 'Whether such orders are contrary to s.85 Native Title Act, s.78 Judiciary Act, and Chapter III of the Constitution' 'Whether substantial injustice would result if leave is refused']

Ratio Decidendi

The interlocutory orders restricting representation and access to evidence on gender grounds are attended with sufficient doubt and potential for substantial injustice to warrant reconsideration by a Full Court; leave to appeal should be granted.

Court Disposition

leave to appeal granted

Orders

  • ["The first respondent (State of Western Australia) is granted leave to appeal against paragraphs 10, 11, 12 and 13 of Lee J's orders of 11 April 1997." 'The costs of this application are reserved to the Full Court that hears the appeal.']