Sleep v Repatriation Commission [2012] FCA 422

FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

Sleep v Repatriation Commission [2012] FCA 422 Citation: Sleep v Repatriation Commission [2012] FCA 422

Appeal from: Administrative Appeals Tribunal

Parties: KENNETH JOHN SLEEP v REPATRIATION COMMISSION

File number(s): SAD 150 of 2011

Judges: BESANKO J

Date of judgment: 27 April 2012

Catchwords: PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – where applicant sought to appeal from a decision of the Administrative Appeals Tribunal pursuant to s 44(1) of the Administrative Appeals Tribunal Act 1975 (Cth) ("AAT Act") – where respondent issued interlocutory application seeking to have proceeding summarily dismissed – whether notice of appeal disclosed question of law as required by s 44 of AAT Act – whether jurisdiction to hear appeal arose – where respondent claimed issue involved re-agitation of a matter previously decided – where applicant self-represented – where respondent made costs risks of appeal known to applicant – whether order of indemnity costs appropriate. Held: The appeal is dismissed.

Legislation: Administrative Appeals Tribunal Act 1975 (Cth), ss 42B, 44(1) Commonwealth of Australia Constitution Act, s 51(xxxi) Federal Court of Australia Act 1976 (Cth), s 31A Federal Court Rules 2011, rr 6.02, 26 Judiciary Act 1903 (Cth), s 78B Veterans Entitlements Act 1986 (Cth), ss 24, 52

Cases cited: Colgate Palmolive Co v Cussons Pty Ltd (1993) 46 FCR 225, cited Kenneth John Sleep v Repatriation Commission [2011] AATA 349, cited Sleep v Repatriation Commission [2009] FCA 472, cited Sleep v Repatriation Commission [2009] FCA 1413, cited Sleep v Repatriation Commission AATA 1100 [2008], cited Sleep v Repatriation Commission AATA 1101 [2008], cited Sleep v Repatriation Commission [2011] FCA 1153, cited