Federal Court of Australia
Federal Court of Australia
Quach v Marks (No 2) [2021] FCA 922 File number: ACD 44 of 2020
Judgment of: ABRAHAM J
Date of judgment: 10 August 2021
Catchwords: HIGH COURT AND FEDERAL COURT – application for recusal of a judge on basis of apprehended bias – where presiding judge previously decided matters adversely to applicant – no basis for recusal established PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – application to set aside originating application for want of jurisdiction under r 13.01 of Federal Court Rules 2011 (Cth) – where claim is a "colourable" federal claim – application to set aside originating application granted PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE– application for summary dismissal under r 26.01 of Federal Court Rules 2011 (Cth) – where no reasonable prospects of success – where proceedings instituted vexatiously – where no reasonable cause of action disclosed – application for summary dismissal granted
Legislation: Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2013 (NSW) s 60 Crimes Act 1914 (Cth) Evidence Act 1995 (Cth) s 91 Federal Court of Australia Act 1976 (Cth) ss 19(1), 31A(2) Federal Court Rules 2011 (Cth) rr 13.01, 26.01 Health Practitioner Regulation National Law 2009 (NSW)
Cases cited: Burgundy Royale Investments Pty Ltd v Westpac Banking Corporation (1987) 18 FCR 212 CNY17 v Minister for Immigration and Border Protection [2019] HCA 50; (2019) 268 CLR 76 Doggett v Commonwealth Bank of Australia [2019] FCAFC 19 Ebner v Official Trustee in Bankruptcy [2000] HCA 63; (2000) 205 CLR 337 Felton v Mulligan (1971) 124 CLR 367 Frugtniet v Secretary, Department of Social Services [2021] FCAFC 127 GetSwift Ltd v Webb [2021] FCAFC 26 Health Care Complaints Commission v Quach (No 2) [2015] NSWCATOD 32 Health Care Complaints Commission v Quach [2015] NSWCATOD 2 Johnson v Johnson [2000] HCA 48; (2000) 201 CLR 488 Livesey v The New South Wales Bar Association [1983] HCA 17; (1983) 151 CLR 288 Michael Wilson & Partners Ltd v Nicholls [2011] HCA 48; (2011) 244 CLR 427 Page v Sydney Seaplanes Pty Ltd [2020] FCA 537; (2020) 277 FCR 658 Qantas Airways Ltd v Lustig [2015] FCA 253; (2015) 228 FCR 148 Quach v Australian Health Practitioner Regulation Agency [2021] FCA 313 Quach v Marks [2021] FCA 335 Quach v New South Wales Civil and Administrative Tribunal [2020] NSWCA 214 Quach v New South Wales Health Care Complaints Commission [2016] NSWCA 10 Quach v New South Wales Health Care Complaints Commission; Quach v New South Wales Civil and Administrative Tribunal [2017] NSWCA 267 Rana v Google Inc [2017] FCAFC 156; (2017) 254 FCR 1 In Re JRL; Ex parte CJL [1986] HCA 39; (1986) 161 CLR 342
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