Caldar v Carlsund [2007] FCA 781

Caldar v Carlsund [2007] FCA 781

The materials disclosed no arguable basis for the applicant's allegations against the Deputy Registrar. In considering whether the intended special leave documents complied with the High Court Rules, the Deputy Registrar was acting judicially as part of the High Court's judicial power, not administratively. The applicant was in substance asking the Federal Court to question an exercise of the High Court's judicial power, which the Federal Court could not do. The proceeding was therefore doomed to failure and was dismissed under O 20 r 2.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
15 May 2007
Procedural Posture
Administrative Law Judicial Review Application Concerning Conduct of the Deputy Registrar of the High Court of Australia / Judgment on the Second Respondent's Motion to Dismiss the Applications Pursuant to O 20 R 2 of the Federal Court Rules
Outcome
The application of 30 January 2007 and the amended application of 6 March 2007 were dismissed with costs.
Legal Topics
['judicial Review of Decisions and Conduct' 'whether Conduct of a Deputy Registrar Was Administrative or Judicial' 'summary Dismissal Where No Reasonable Cause of Action Is Disclosed' 'special Leave to Appeal Filing Requirements']
['administrative Law' 'federal Court Procedure' 'high Court Procedure'] ['judicial Review of Decisions and Conduct' 'whether Conduct of a Deputy Registrar Was Administrative or Judicial' 'summary Dismissal Where No Reasonable Cause of Action Is Disclosed' 'special Leave to Appeal Filing Requirements']

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

Administrative Law Judicial Review Application Concerning Conduct of the Deputy Registrar of the High Court of Australia / Judgment on the Second Respondent's Motion to Dismiss the Applications Pursuant to O 20 R 2 of the Federal Court Rules

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the applicant had an arguable basis for claims that the Deputy Registrar denied natural justice, exceeded authority, acted improperly or acted in bad faith in relation to an intended High Court special leave application.' 'Whether the Deputy Registrar, in applying the High Court Rules to documents sought to be filed for an exercise of judicial power, was acting judicially rather than administratively.' 'Whether the Federal Court could call into question an exercise of the judicial power of the High Court.' 'Whether the proceeding should be dismissed under O 20 r 2 of the Federal Court Rules.']

Ratio Decidendi

The materials disclosed no arguable basis for the applicant's allegations against the Deputy Registrar. In considering whether the intended special leave documents complied with the High Court Rules, the Deputy Registrar was acting judicially as part of the High Court's judicial power, not administratively. The applicant was in substance asking the Federal Court to question an exercise of the High Court's judicial power, which the Federal Court could not do. The proceeding was therefore doomed to failure and was dismissed under O 20 r 2.

Court Disposition

The application of 30 January 2007 and the amended application of 6 March 2007 were dismissed with costs.

Orders

  • ['The application of 30 January 2007 and the amended application of 6 March 2007 be dismissed.' "The applicant is to pay the second respondent's costs." 'The second respondent is to be entitled to be paid its costs of the proceedings from funds retained by the second respondent in the estate of Rachel Isabell...