Pardo v Australian Health Practitioner Regulation Agency [2016] TASSC 31 — Judicial Review — Barrister AI
← Back
Pardo v Australian Health Practitioner Regulation Agency
[2016] TASSC 31
Supreme Court of Tasmania
Good law / bad law (Silk subscription)
Add to Notebook
0 highlights
0 notes
Copy Citation
More
Built by Barristers,
For Australian Law.
See how it works
Interrogate
Catchwords
Administrative Law
›
Judicial review
›
Powers of courts under judicial review legislation
›
Stay of proceedings and interlocutory relief
›
Application to summarily dismiss application to review
›
Failure by applicant for review to identify in her application any specific decision, conduct or failure to make decision sought to be reviewed
›
Decision or failure to make a decision identified during hearing not a reviewable decision
›
Relief claimed not relief Court had power to grant.
Judicial Review Act (Tas) 2000, s 38.
Aust Dig Administrative Law [1084]
Case Details
Citation
[2016] TASSC 31
Court
TASSC
Jurisdiction
Tasmania
Unlock so much more with Barrister AI
The full text is available to signed-in members.
[2016] TASSC 31
6 authorities it relies on
2005
2007
2009
2011
2013
2016
Relies on
6
2015
Tanious v Australian Medical Council Ltd
NSWCA 189
2015
Tanious v Australian Medical Council Limited and ; Australian Health Practitioner Regulation Agency
NSWSC 447
2014
Shvetsova v The University of New England
NSWSC 918
2005
Griffith University v Tang
HCA 7
and 2 more after sign-in
Create free account
Already have an account?
Sign in
See how it works
