In the Matter of An Application BY Jerrod James Conomy for Leave to Appeal

IN THE MATTER OF AN APPLICATION BY JERROD JAMES CONOMY FOR LEAVE TO APPEAL
[2018] HCASL 241
P20/2018

The applicant seeks leave to appeal against the decision of Gordon J refusing the applicant leave to issue or file a summons seeking to reopen the applicant's special leave application in P19/2018. An extension of time is required to permit the application to proceed.
By summons filed on 3 August 2018, the applicant seeks to influence the content of the "judgement or disposition" of this application.
It is sufficient to dispose of the application to record that the decision of Gordon J was plainly correct. An appeal to this Court would enjoy no prospect of success. The application for leave to appeal should be refused. In those circumstances, there would be no utility in granting the extension of time that is sought.
Pursuant to r 41.08.1 of the High Court Rules 2004 (Cth), we direct the Registrar to draw up, sign and seal an order dismissing the application.

S.M. Kiefel
15 August 2018 S.J. Gageler

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In the matter of an application by Jerrod James Conomy for leave to appeal, the applicant sought leave to appeal a decision made by Gordon J, who refused the applicant permission to file a summons aimed at reopening the applicant's special leave application in a prior matter. The applicant additionally requested an extension of time to proceed with the application, and sought to influence the content of the judgment or disposition of the current application through a summons filed on 3 August 2018. The case was heard in the High Court of Australia.

The primary legal issue before the court was whether the applicant should be granted leave to appeal against the decision of Gordon J, and if so, whether an extension of time should be granted to permit the application to proceed. The court also needed to determine whether the applicant's summons filed on 3 August 2018 could influence the content of the judgment or disposition of the current application.

The court found that the decision of Gordon J was correct and that an appeal to the High Court would enjoy no prospect of success. The application for leave to appeal was therefore refused. Additionally, since the application for leave to appeal had no prospect of success, there was no utility in granting the extension of time that the applicant sought. Consequently, the court directed the Registrar to draw up, sign and seal an order dismissing the application. The judges who made the decision were S.M. Kiefel and S.J. Gageler, who signed the order on 15 August 2018.

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established