Ferdinands v Registrar Burns [2023] FCA 1646

Ferdinands v Registrar Burns [2023] FCA 1646

The originating application was dismissed because the Registrar was correct to conclude that the documents did not disclose a decision capable of review by the Federal Court. The impugned decision of the Premier was not reviewable under the ADJR Act or s 39B(1) of the Judiciary Act, the constitutional provisions relied on by the applicant did not confer jurisdiction, no genuine constitutional issue arose for s 78B purposes, and the references to the Racial Discrimination Act did not satisfy the preconditions for the Court to adjudicate such a dispute. That was a sufficient basis for refusing to accept the documents for filing and dismissing the application.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
22 December 2023
Procedural Posture
Application for Judicial Review of a Registrar's Refusal to Accept Documents for Filing / Judgment on Originating Application
Outcome
Originating application dismissed.
Legal Topics
['refusal to Accept Documents for Filing' 'abuse of Process' 'frivolous or Vexatious Documents' 'federal Court Jurisdiction' 'reviewability of Decision' 'racial Discrimination Allegations']
['administrative Law' 'judicial Review' 'federal Court Procedure' 'constitutional Law' 'human Rights'] ['refusal to Accept Documents for Filing' 'abuse of Process' 'frivolous or Vexatious Documents' 'federal Court Jurisdiction' 'reviewability of Decision' 'racial Discrimination Allegations']

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 of a Registrar's Refusal to Accept Documents for Filing / Judgment on Originating Application

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether the Registrar's refusal to accept the applicant's documents for filing under r 2.26 of the Federal Court Rules 2011 (Cth) was affected by reviewable error." 'Whether the documents disclosed a decision capable of review by the Federal Court under the Administrative Decisions (Judicial Review) Act 1977 (Cth) or s 39B(1) of the Judiciary Act 1903 (Cth).' "Whether the applicant's reliance on provisions of the Constitution or the Racial Discrimination Act 1975 (Cth) established jurisdiction or otherwise assisted the application." "Whether the documents constituted an abuse of process or were frivolous or vexatious because they sought to agitate grievances arising from the applicant's dismissal from South Australia Police more than 20 years earlier."]

Ratio Decidendi

The originating application was dismissed because the Registrar was correct to conclude that the documents did not disclose a decision capable of review by the Federal Court. The impugned decision of the Premier was not reviewable under the ADJR Act or s 39B(1) of the Judiciary Act, the constitutional provisions relied on by the applicant did not confer jurisdiction, no genuine constitutional issue arose for s 78B purposes, and the references to the Racial Discrimination Act did not satisfy the preconditions for the Court to adjudicate such a dispute. That was a sufficient basis for refusing to accept the documents for filing and dismissing the application.

Court Disposition

Originating application dismissed.

Orders

  • ['The originating application is dismissed.']