IN THE MATTER OF AN APPLICATION FRO A WRIT OF PROHIBITION AND A WRIT OF CERTIORARI AGAINST MR JUSTICE JOSKE OF THE FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA; EX PARTE IAN BARTON CHITTICK

IN_THE MATTER OF AN APPLICATION FOR

A_WRIT OF PROHIBITION AND A WRIT OF

CERTIORARI AGAINST MR JUSTICE JOSKE

OF THE FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA

EX PARTE IAN BARTON CHITTICK

JUDGMENT. DAWSON J. (ORAL)

—

IN_THE MATTER OF AN APPLICATION FOR A_WRIT OF PROHIBITION AND A WRIT OF CERTIORARI AGAINST MR_ JUSTICE JOSKE OF THE FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA

EX PARTE IAN BARTON CHITTICK

This is an application for orders nisi for prohibition and certiorari in relation to an order made by Joske J, in the Family Court pursuant to s.64(11B) of the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth), as amended. Joske J. refused to stay the operation of the order

which he made.

Under s.94(1) of the Family Law Act an appeal lies from the order of Joske J. to a Full Court of the Family Court and I think that for this reason I ought not grant the orders nisi for , prerogative writs. No doubt in an exceptional case I would be entitled to do so but I do not think that this case exhibits the necessary exceptional features. Two reasons were suggested to me

as justifying that course:

(1) The matter is of importance and is likely to require

attention by the High Court eventually.

Be that as it may, I do not think the High Court should be required to consider the matter without the benefit of a prior consideration by the Full Court of the Family Court unless

circumstances were to compel that course.

2.

(2) Secondly, it was suggested that protracted delays are

involved in bringing on an appeal before the Full Court

of the Family Court. .

I do not understand why this should be so in an urgent matter. It is not, however, in my view, a reason for invoking the

jurisdiction of the High Court.

In The Queen v. Cook; ex parte Twigg (1980) 147 C.L.R.15, a number of members of this Court adverted to the undesirability of substituting review by prerogative writ for the ordinary remedy of appeal. There were exceptional circumstances in that case justifying the procedure there which I think are absent in 'this