Endresz v Cth

[2020] ACTCA 48

ACT Court of Appeal

Built by Barristers,
For Australian Law.

See how it works

Interrogate

Catchwords

1. Appeal
2. › Application for leave to appeal
3. › Leave to appeal out of time
4. › Whether proposed appeal competent
5. › Whether dismissal for want of prosecution was interlocutory or final decision
6. › Whether appellant may appeal more than once against same orders
7. › Supreme Court Act 1933 (ACT), ss 37E, 37J, 37O
8. › Court Procedures Rules 2006 (ACT), rr 5603, 5604
1. Appeal
2. › Application for leave to appeal
3. › Leave to appeal out of time
4. › Discretionary considerations
5. › Length of delay
6. › Explanation for delay
7. › Merits of proposed appeal
8. › Failure to raise grounds in original appeal
9. › Efficient administration of justice
1. Appeal
2. › Want of prosecution
3. › Dismissal of appeal for want of prosecution
4. › Whether order confirming primary judge's orders is final or interlocutory
5. › Court Procedures Rules 2006 (ACT), r 5603(3)(a)

Quick Take

In the ACT, an order dismissing an appeal for want of prosecution under r 5603(3)(a) of the Court Procedures Rules 2006 (ACT) that also confirms the orders appealed from constitutes a final disposition of the appeal, precluding any further appeal against the same orders. A 'judgment on the merits' is not essential to a judgment being final. There is no statutory mechanism under the Supreme Court Act 1933 (ACT) to appeal from a single judge of the Court of Appeal exercising jurisdiction under s 37J(1), other than by special leave to the High Court.