Smits v Loel (No 3) [2015] FCA 77

FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

Smits v Loel (No 3) [2015] FCA 77 Citation: Smits v Loel (No 3) [2015] FCA 77

Parties: LEONARDUS GERARDUS SMITS v JAMES BERESORD [SIC] LOEL, PIONEER INVESTMENTS (AUST) PTY. LTD. and LILLAS AND LOEL LAWYERS

File number: QUD 3 of 2015

Judge: REEVES J

Date of judgment: 13 February 2015

Catchwords: PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – application for extension of time to seek leave to appeal – where proceedings dismissed under Federal Court Rules 2011 (Cth), r 26.01(1)(d) as an abuse of process – whether order under Federal Court Rules 2011 (Cth), r 26.01 interlocutory in nature – whether to exercise discretion to extend time under Federal Court Rules 2011 (Cth), r 1.39 – whether to exercise discretion to grant leave under Federal Court of Australia Act 1976 (Cth), s 24(1A) – whether sufficient doubt to justify leave to appeal – failure to identify any specific error Held: application dismissed

Legislation: Federal Court of Australia Act 1976 (Cth) Jurisdiction of Courts (Cross-Vesting) Act 1987 (Cth) Federal Court Rules 2011 (Cth) Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 1999 (Qld)

Cases cited: Cement Australia Pty Ltd v Australian Competition and Consumer Commission (2101) 187 FCR 261; [2010] FCAFC 101 Cement Australia Pty Ltd v Australian Competition and Consumer Commission (2010) 187 FCR 261; [2010] FCAFC 101 Décor Corporation Pty Ltd v Dart Industries Inc (1991) 33 FCR 397 Rogers v R (1994) 181 CLR 251 Sharman License Holdings Ltd v Universal Music Aust Pty Ltd [2005] FCA 802 Shaw v MAB Corporation Pty Ltd [2013] FCA 1231 Shaw v MAB Corporation Pty Ltd (2014) 220 FCR 425; [2014] FCA 62 Smits v Loel [2014] FCA 1341