FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
Lin v State Rail Authority of New South Wales [2003] FCA 1324
SARAH LIN v STATE RAIL AUTHORITY OF NEW SOUTH WALES
N 1728 OF 2003
MOORE J
SYDNEY
11 NOVEMBER 2003
|
IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA |
|
|
NEW SOUTH WALES DISTRICT REGISTRY |
N 1728 OF 2003 |
ON APPEAL FROM AN INTERLOCUTORY DECISION OF A SINGLE JUDGE OF THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
|
BETWEEN: |
SARAH LIN APPELLANT
|
|
AND:
|
STATE RAIL AUTHORITY OF NEW SOUTH WALES RESPONDENT |
|
JUDGE: |
MOORE J |
|
DATE OF ORDER: |
11 NOVEMBER 2003 |
|
WHERE MADE: |
SYDNEY |
THE COURT ORDERS THAT:
1. The application for leave to appeal be dismissed.
2. The appellant pay the costs of the respondent.
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 |
N 1728 OF 2003 |
ON APPEAL FROM AN INTERLOCUTORY DECISION OF A SINGLE JUDGE OF THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
|
BETWEEN: |
SARAH LIN APPELLANT
|
|
AND:
|
STATE RAIL AUTHORITY OF NEW SOUTH WALES RESPONDENT
|
|
DATE OF ORDER: |
|
|
WHERE MADE: |
SYDNEY |
REASONS FOR JUDGMENT
1 This is what purports to be an application by Ms Sarah Lin for leave to appeal against a judgment, decision or direction of Wilcox J of 30 October 2003, fixing for hearing a notice of motion filed on 29 October 2003 by the respondent to the proceedings, the State Rail Authority of New South Wales. In that notice of motion, the State Rail Authority of New South Wales seeks orders dismissing the principal application by Ms Lin on the basis that it is frivolous or vexatious.
2 Assuming that the application for leave to appeal is competent, nothing has been demonstrated in my view to suggest that any error attended the decision of Wilcox J to fix the motion of the State Rail Authority for hearing. Accordingly, I propose to dismiss the application for leave to appeal with costs.
|
I certify that the preceding two (2) numbered paragraphs are a true copy of the Reasons for Judgment herein of the Honourable Justice Moore. |
Associate:
Dated: 2 December 2003
|
The appellant appeared in person. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Counsel for the Respondent: |
A P Coleman |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Solicitor for the Respondent: |
Henry Davis York |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Date of Hearing: |
11 November 2003 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Date of Judgment: |
11 November 2003 |
|
