Federal Court of Australia
FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
Smith v Commonwealth of Australia [2019] FCA 2193 File numbers: NSD 1908 of 2016 NSD 1155 of 2017 NSD 1388 of 2018
Judge: LEE J
Date of judgment: 24 December 2019
Catchwords: PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – referees – proper role of referee – order sought to the effect that the respondent send a communication to the referee to clarify role of referee – degree of deference to be afforded to referee in its conduct – whether procedural fairness requires that parties always have an opportunity to comment on new material gathered by referee – proposition put too highly – procedural fairness is a flexible obligation which depends on individual circumstances in each case – orders sought not made
Legislation: Federal Court of Australia Act 1976 (Cth) Pt VB Federal Court Rules 2011 (Cth) r 28.65
Cases cited: CPB Contractors Pty Ltd v Celsus Pty Ltd (formerly known as SA Health Partnership Nominees Pty Ltd) (No 2) [2018] FCA 2112; (2018) 364 ALR 129 Kadam v MiiResorts Group 1 Pty Ltd (No 4) [2017] FCA 1139; (2017) 252 FCR 298 Kioa v West (1985) 159 CLR 550 Re Minister for Immigration and Multicultural and Indigenous Affairs; ex parte Lam [2003] HCA 6; (2003) 214 CLR 1 Telecomputing PCS Pty Ltd v Bridge Wholesale Acceptance Corporation (Aust) Ltd (1991) 24 NSWLR 513
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