Federal Court of Australia
Federal Court of Australia
Chandrasekaran v Royal Australian and New Zealand College of Psychiatrists (No 3) [2020] FCA 1533 Appeal from: Chandrasekaran v Royal Australian and New Zealand College of Psychiatrists (No 2) [2020] FCA 1028
File number(s): NSD 886 of 2020
Judgment of: RARES J
Date of judgment: 25 September 2020
Catchwords: PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – application for extension of time and leave to appeal from decision denying reinstatement and recusal – no basis on which leave to appeal ought be granted – failure to comply with r 16.02 Federal Court Rules 2011 (Cth) – statement of claim fundamentally deficient – proceedings an abuse of process
Legislation: Competition and Consumer Act 2010 (Cth) sch 2, s 18 Federal Court of Australia Act 1976 (Cth) s 31A Federal Court Rules 2011 (Cth) rr 16.01, 16.02, 26.01
Cases cited: Bienstein v Bienstein (2003) 195 ALR 225 Chandrasekaran v Royal Australian and New Zealand College of Psychiatrists [2020] FCA 214 Chandrasekaran v Royal Australian and New Zealand College of Psychiatrists (No 2) [2020] FCA 1028 Chandrasekaran v Royal Australian and New Zealand College of Psychiatrists [2019] FCA 1687 Re Luck (2003) 203 ALR 1 Rozenblit v Vainer (2018) 262 CLR 478 Stuart v Rabobank Australia Ltd [2019] FCA 343
Date of hearing: 25 September 2020
Division: General Division
Registry: New South Wales
National Practice Area: Administrative and Constitutional Law and Human Rights
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