Ogle,W. & Anor v Strickland, J. & Ors [1986] FCA 325

&

CATCHWORDS Tudicial review - film approved by Censorship Board and registered by Chief Censor said toa be blasphemous - applicants for relief two ministers of religion - whether application brought within a reasonable time - whether applicants have standin, to sue - appropriateness or otherwise of summary

determination of these issues.

Administrative Decisions (Judicial Review) Act 1977, ss. 3, ® and ll.

Customs (Cinematograph Films) Pequlations, regs. 9, 10, 11, 13

and 39,

WALTER OGLE and ANOR. wv. JANET STRICKLAND and ORS.

No. G264 of 1986

Coram: Sheppard J. Date : 4 Auqust 1986

Place: Sydnev

TN_THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

) ) NEW SOUTH WALES DISTRICT REGISTRY ) No, G264 of 1986 ) GENERAL DIVISTON y

BETWEEN : WALTER OGLE and ANOR.

Applicants AND:

TANET STRICKLAND and ORS.

Respondents

CORAM: SHEPPARD J. PLACE: SYDNEY

DATE : 4 AUGUST 1986

MINUTES OF ORDER

THE COURT ORDERS THAT: -

1. The application be dismissed.

Ir

The applicants pay the first and second respondents the

costs of their notice of motion filed on 25 July 1986.

3. The applicants pay the respondents their costs of the application. NOTE: Settlement and entry of orders is dealt with in Order 246 of

the Federal Court Rules.

TW THE FEDEPAL COUPT OF _ANSTPALIA 3

WEW SOUTH WALES DISTRICT REGISTRY 1 Wo. G264 of 1986 J

GENERAL DIVISTON ) BETWEEN :

WALTER OGLE and ANOR.

Applicants AND: JANET STRICKLAND and OPS.

Pespondents

COPAM: Sheppard J,

DATE : 4 August 1986

REASONS FOR JMDGMENT

HIS HONOUR: To be dealt with are two notices of motion. one faken out by the first and second respondents seeking an order that the vorincipal application be dismissed, and the other taken out by the applicants seeking an order that the hearing of the principal application be expedited. I propose to deal with the respondents' notice of motion first of all because, if the order