McCardle v Johnson (No 3) [2023] FCA 790
The proceeding should be dismissed for want of prosecution as the applicant has failed to comply with court orders to provide security for costs and to file and serve an amended statement of claim, has not demonstrated any intention to prosecute the proceedings, nor provided evidence or explanation for non-compliance. The recusal application is rejected as the applicant's reasons do not satisfy the legal test for apprehended bias.
- Jurisdiction
- Australia
- Judgment Date
- 11 July 2023
- Procedural Posture
- Practice and Procedure / Hearing for Dismissal of Proceedings for Want of Prosecution
- Outcome
- Proceedings dismissed
- Legal Topics
- ['bankruptcy' 'security for Costs' 'dismissal for Want of Prosecution' 'recusal/bias']
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Procedural Posture
Practice and Procedure / Hearing for Dismissal of Proceedings for Want of Prosecution
Legal Issues
- 1 ['Should the proceeding be dismissed for want of prosecution due to failure to comply with court orders?' 'Should the judge recuse himself for alleged actual or apprehended bias?']
Ratio Decidendi
The proceeding should be dismissed for want of prosecution as the applicant has failed to comply with court orders to provide security for costs and to file and serve an amended statement of claim, has not demonstrated any intention to prosecute the proceedings, nor provided evidence or explanation for non-compliance. The recusal application is rejected as the applicant's reasons do not satisfy the legal test for apprehended bias.
Court Disposition
Proceedings dismissed
Orders
- ['The proceeding be dismissed.']
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