Federal Court of Australia
wr
~~
JUDGMENT No. 988.31.
CATCHWORDS Administrative law - Delegated authority - Instrument of delegation subject to policies and guidelines - Whether policies and guidelines mandatory or directory - Whether decision ultra vires. Practice and procedure - Application for review - Standing - Loss of entitlements - Who 1s a person aggrieved.
Administrative Decisions (Judicial Review) Act 1977 (Cth), s.5.
Postal Services Act 1975 (Cth), ss.6, 7, 9, 36.
W.H. BROADBRIDGE & ANOR v. MALCOLM BARRY STAMMERS
No. 152 of 1987
Bowen C.J., Beaumont and Gummow JJ.
4 November 1987
Sydney
IN_THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA )
) NEW SOUTH WALES DISTRICT REGISTRY ) No. 152 of 1987
) GENERAL DIVISION )
ON APPEAL FROM A SINGLE JUDGE OF THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
BETWEEN: W.H. BROADBRIDGE
First Appellant
AND: AUSTRALIAN POSTAL COMMISSION
Second Appellant
AND: MALCOLM BARRY STAMMERS
Respondent
MINUTES OF ORDER
Court: Bowen C.J., Beaumont and Gummow JJ. Date order made: 4 November 1987 Where made: Sydney
THE COURT ORDERS:
1. Appeal allowed in part.
2. Set aside orders 2, 3 and 4 made on 1 April 1987;
in lieu thereof order that the application for an order of review be dismissed with no order as to
costs. 3. Make no order as to the costs of the appeal.
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 ) No. 152 of 1987
) GENERAL DIVISION )
ON APPEAL FROM A SINGLE JUDGE OF THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
BETWEEN: W.H. BROADBRIDGE First Appellant
AND: AUSTRALIAN POSTAL COMMISSION
Second Appellant AND: MALCOLM BARRY STAMMERS
Respondent
CORAM: Bowen C.J., Beaumont and Gummow JJ.
DATED: 4 November 1987
REASONS FOR JUDGMENT
THE COURT: In November 1986, Mr. W.H. Broadbridge, the first appellant, acting as the Deputy State Manager (Metropolitan Services) and Chief Manager, Operations, of the Australian Postal Commission, the second appellant, decided to close the post office at Watsons Bay, N.S.W. The respondent, Mr. M.B. Stammers, challenged this decision in proceedings brought in the Court
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