Winch Industries Australia Pty Ltd v Isele, J.A. & Anor [1986] FCA 155

Winch Industries Australia Pty Ltd v Isele, J.A. & Anor [1986] FCA 155

The extension of time was granted because, although solicitor error contributed to the failure to commence ADJR proceedings in time, the Customs documents provided an alleviating explanation for the mistake, no prejudice to the respondents was suggested, and refusal would leave only a general law remedy potentially inhibited by s.9 of the Administrative Decisions (Judicial Review) Act.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
22 April 1986
Procedural Posture
Application for Extension of Time to Bring Proceedings Under the Administrative Decisions (judicial Review) Act Concerning Seizure of Imported Winches Under the Customs Act / Ex Tempore Reasons for Judgment and Orders
Outcome
Application for extension of time granted.
Legal Topics
['extension of Time' 'judicial Review' 'seizure of Imported Goods' 'forfeiture of Goods' 'accrued Jurisdiction' 'costs']
['administrative Law' 'customs Law'] ['extension of Time' 'judicial Review' 'seizure of Imported Goods' 'forfeiture of Goods' 'accrued Jurisdiction' 'costs']

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 Extension of Time to Bring Proceedings Under the Administrative Decisions (judicial Review) Act Concerning Seizure of Imported Winches Under the Customs Act / Ex Tempore Reasons for Judgment and Orders

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether time should be extended to allow proceedings under the Administrative Decisions (Judicial Review) Act in respect of the seizure of imported winches.' "Whether the applicant's failure to commence within time was sufficiently explained by reliance on Customs Act notices and solicitor error." 'Whether any prejudice to the respondents weighed against an extension.' 'Whether costs of the extension application should be borne by the applicant or treated as costs in the principal proceedings.']

Ratio Decidendi

The extension of time was granted because, although solicitor error contributed to the failure to commence ADJR proceedings in time, the Customs documents provided an alleviating explanation for the mistake, no prejudice to the respondents was suggested, and refusal would leave only a general law remedy potentially inhibited by s.9 of the Administrative Decisions (Judicial Review) Act.

Court Disposition

Application for extension of time granted.

Orders

  • ['The time within which the application for relief under the Administrative Decisions (Judicial Review) Act may be brought be extended to the 28 November 19985.' 'The costs of and incidental to the application for extension of time be costs of the respondents in the principal proceedings.']