FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

 

Parrett v Secretary, Department of Family & Community Services

[2002] FCA 950

 


 


JAMES PARRETT v SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF FAMILY AND COMMUNITY SERVICES

N945 of 2002



MADGWICK J

12 JULY 2002

SYDNEY


IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

 

NEW SOUTH WALES DISTRICT REGISTRY

N945 of 2002

 

BETWEEN:

JAMES PARRETT

APPLICANT

 

AND:

SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF FAMILY AND COMMUNITY SERVICES

RESPONDENT

 

 

JUDGE:

MADGWICK J

DATE OF ORDER:

12 JULY 2002

WHERE MADE:

SYDNEY

 

 

THE COURT FURTHER ORDERS THAT:

 

1.                  The matter be remitted to the Administrative Appeals Tribunal, differently constituted, for determination according to law.

2.                  The respondent to pay the applicant’s costs.


Note:    Settlement and entry of orders is dealt with in Order 36 of the Federal Court Rules.


IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

 

NEW SOUTH WALES DISTRICT REGISTRY

N945 of 2002

 

BETWEEN:

JAMES PARRETT

APPLICANT

 

AND:

SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF FAMILY AND COMMUNITY SERVICES

RESPONDENT

 

 

JUDGE:

MADGWICK J

DATE:

12 JULY 2002

PLACE:

SYDNEY


REASONS FOR JUDGMENT

(revised from transcript)

HIS HONOUR:

1                     In this matter I have already given my reasons for decision in relation to the main point:  Parrett v Secretary, Department of Family & Community Services [2002] FCA 716.  However, another point has been raised in the application and that is whether the Social Security Appeal Tribunal had erred in its conclusions as to the practical utility of the appeal to it, because of some delay in lodging the appeal.  The parties are at one that the Social Security Appeal Tribunal made a mistake in that regard.  That is a joint view with which I agree, but I need not make any formal order to give effect to that view.

2                     I have already ordered that the decision of the Administrative Appeals Tribunal of 21 May 2001 be set aside.  I will further order that the matter be remitted to the Tribunal, differently constituted, for determination according to law.  The respondent is to pay the applicant’s costs.

I certify that the preceding two (2) numbered paragraphs are a true copy of the Reasons for Judgment herein of the Honourable Justice Madgwick.


Associate:


Dated:              12 July 2002



Counsel for the Applicant:

Mr A Anforth



Solicitor for the Applicant:

Welfare Rights & Legal Centre



Counsel for the Respondent:

Ms R M Henderson



Solicitor for the Respondent:

Minter Ellison



Date of Hearing:

12 July 2002



Date of Judgment:

12 July 2002