de Jersey CJ, Wilson and Douglas JJJudgment of the Court.
Catchwords
PROCEDURE – INFERIOR COURTS – QUEENSLAND – DISTRICT
COURTS – CIVIL JURISDICTION – APPEAL AND NEW TRIAL
– applicant
sought leave to appeal against District Court Judge’s dismissal of appeal
Source
Original judgment source is linked above.
Catchwords
PROCEDURE – INFERIOR COURTS – QUEENSLAND – DISTRICTCOURTS – CIVIL JURISDICTION – APPEAL AND NEW TRIAL– applicantsought leave to appeal against District Court Judge’s dismissal of appealfor want of jurisdiction –appeal dismissed where applicant failed toenter in required recognizance within time, and second respondent refused towaive consequencesof non-compliance – whether second respondent a partyto appeal such that his waiver refusal could be determinative of jurisdiction– where s 222(2)(a)(i) Justices Act requires service of notice ofappeal on ‘the person concerned in upholding (the)decision’PROCEDURE – INFERIOR COURTS – QUEENSLAND– DISTRICT COURTS – CIVIL JURISDICTION – JURISDICTION –whether second respondent’s view could be determinative of jurisdiction– applicability of ex parte Allen – effect of s 229(1)Justices Act – whether late compliance should instead be viewed asan irregularity enlivening a discretion in the Court whether or not toproceedAppeal Costs Fund Act 1973 (Qld), s 15, s
15(1)District Court Act 1967 (Qld), s 118Justices
Act 1886 (Qld), s 39, s 222, s 222(2)(a)(i), s 222(2)(a)(ii), s 222(2A), s
229(1)Carey v Armstrong (1972) 66 QJPR 136,
consideredForsyth v O’Connor (1970) 66 QJPR 38,
consideredR v the Judge of the District Court at Brisbane and Davies
ex
parte Allen [1969] QdR 114, distinguishedScottorn v Howard (1972)
66 QJPR 34, consideredVon Schulz v Durrant [2000] QCA 235,
considered
Judgment (11 paragraphs)
[1]
PROCEDURE - INFERIOR COURTS - QUEENSLAND - DISTRICT COURTS - CIVIL JURISDICTION - APPEAL AND NEW TRIAL - applicant sought leave to appeal against District Court Judge's dismissal of appeal for want of jurisdiction - appeal dismissed where applicant failed to enter in required recognizance within time, and second respondent refused to waive consequences of non-compliance - whether second respondent a party to appeal such that his waiver refusal could be determinative of jurisdiction - where s 222(2)(a)(i) Justices Act requires service of notice of appeal on 'the person concerned in upholding (the) decision'
[2]
PROCEDURE - INFERIOR COURTS - QUEENSLAND - DISTRICT COURTS - CIVIL JURISDICTION - JURISDICTION - whether second respondent's view could be determinative of jurisdiction - applicability of ex parte Allen - effect of s 229(1) Justices Act - whether late compliance should instead be viewed as an irregularity enlivening a discretion in the Court whether or not to proceed