The Court declined to immediately dismiss three appeals but made self-executing orders requiring the appellant to either provide a psychiatric or psychological capacity report or appoint a litigation representative within six weeks, failing which the appeals would be dismissed for non-compliance and want of prosecution. The Court held that brief, conclusory letters from a general practitioner were insufficient to establish legal capacity, and that the impasse created by the appellant's refusal to undergo specialist assessment could not continue indefinitely given the prejudice to respondents and the demands of the overarching purpose in s 37M of the Federal Court of Australia Act 1976. The Court also held that pro bono legal representatives who raised capacity concerns were acting appropriately and in the appellant's interests, and that the appellant's complaints about those representatives did not warrant a further pro bono referral.
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 1 later case that cites this judgment.
1 of the 1 citing case carries a classified treatment. How each court treated it is available to signed-in members.