Federal Court of Australia
FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
Potier v Minister for Immigration & Multicultural & Indigenous Affairs [2004] FCAFC 288
PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE - application for leave to appeal from interlocutory judgment that requirements of O 62 r 46(3)(d) not be waived - whether judgment attended with sufficient doubt to warrant reconsideration by a Full Court - whether substantial injustice would result if leave were refused Federal Court of Australia Act 1976 (Cth) ss 24(1A), 35A(5) Federal Court Rules O 52 r 10, 62 rr 46, 46(1), 46(2), 46(3)(a), 46(3)(c), 46(3)(d), 46(4), 46 (6) Carr v Finance Corporation of Australia Ltd (1981) 147 CLR 246 cited Décor Corporation Pty Ltd v Dart Industries Inc (1991) 33 FCR 397 cited Dudzinski v Kellow (2000) FCA 740 cited Hall v Nominal Defendant (1966) 117 CLR 423 cited Licul v Corney (1976) 180 CLR 213 cited Malouf v Malouf (1999) 86 FCR 134 cited Mazukov v University of Tasmania [2004] FCAFC 159 cited
MALCOLM HUNTLEY POTIER v MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION AND MULTICULTURAL AND INDIGENOUS AFFAIRS N852-856 OF 2004 RYAN, LEE AND MERKEL JJ 19 NOVEMBER 2004 PERTH (HEARD IN SYDNEY)
IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
NEW SOUTH WALES DISTRICT REGISTRY N852-856 OF 2004
BETWEEN: MALCOLM HUNTLEY POTIER
APPLICANT
AND: MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION AND MULTICULTURAL AND INDIGENOUS AFFAIRS
RESPONDENT
JUDGES: RYAN, LEE AND MERKEL JJ
DATE OF ORDER: 19 NOVEMBER 2004
WHERE MADE: PERTH (HEARD IN SYDNEY)
THE COURT ORDERS THAT: 1. The application for leave to appeal be refused. 2. The applicant pay the respondent's costs of the application. Note: Settlement and entry of orders is dealt with in Order 36 of the Federal Court Rules.
IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
NEW SOUTH WALES DISTRICT REGISTRY N852-856 OF 2004
BETWEEN: MALCOLM HUNTLEY POTIER
We try to embed the page this law was scraped from. If the site blocks framing, you still get the link and a local excerpt.
Last checked with source on —
Checking whether the official page can be embedded…
Plain-English simplify of this law: a short summary, key points, and both sides of the argument. Generated on first view via Replicate, then cached. Vote on what helps your study.
No study brief is cached for this law yet. Sign up to generate a plain-English brief.
Sign up to generate