Federal Court of Australia
FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
Drummond v Canberra Institute of Technology [2020] FCAFC 131 Appeal from: Application for leave to appeal and extension of time: Drummond v Canberra Institute Of Technology [2019] FCCA 2612
File number: ACD 73 of 2019
Judges: FLICK, KATZMANN AND CHARLESWORTH JJ
Date of judgment: 31 July 2020
Catchwords: PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – appeal from orders dismissing an originating application without determining the substantive merits of the appellant's claims – where appellant applied for an adjournment of a trial for reasons including the impact of the litigation on his existing mental illness – where primary judge vacated the trial dates and dismissed all extant applications subject to a conditional grant of leave to have the proceedings reopened – where the conditions on the grant of leave required the appellant to file medical evidence about his mental competency – where primary judge concluded the appellant would be unable to adequately conduct the proceedings should the matter be relisted and so dismissed the originating application "on a final basis" – where primary judge had no regard to the provisions of the Federal Circuit Court Rules 2001 (Cth) providing for the appointment of a litigation guardian, whether the discretion of the primary judge miscarried – appeal allowed
Legislation: Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth) Federal Circuit Court of Australia Act 1999 (Cth) ss 14, 42 Federal Court of Australia Act 1976 ss 24(1A), 24 (1D), 27, 37M Federal Circuit Court Rules 2001 (Cth) rr 1.03, 11.08, 11.09, 13.03
Cases cited: Adam P Brown Male Fashions Pty Ltd v Philip Morris Inc (1981) 148 CLR 170 AON Risk Services Australia Limited v Australian National University (2009) 239 CLR 175 BKL15 v Minister for Immigration and Border Protection (2016) 241 FCR 450 Décor Corp Pty Limited v Dart Industries Inc (1991) 33 FCR 397 Expense Reduction Analysts Group Pty Ltd v Armstrong Strategic Management and Marketing Pty Ltd (2013) 250 CLR 303 House v The King (1936) 55 CLR 499 L v Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Commission [2006] FCAFC 114 Rozenblit v Vainer (2018) 262 CLR 478 SZAJB v Minister for Immigration and Citizenship (2008) 168 FCR 410
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