Multiple habeas corpus applications within short timeframe an abuse of process?

Federal Court. Can it be said that, "once judgment has been reserved, it is only in exceptional circumstances that the Court will subsequently give leave to a party to re-open the case"? Were the circumstances of this case, where the applicant was a self-represented litigant seeking habeas corpus, exceptional? Can it be said that "abuse of process principles can be applied in respect of repeated applications for the issue of writs of habeas corpus within a short time frame"?

Some of the questions to the Federal Court (FCA) were as follows:

Question 1: Can it be said that, "once judgment has been reserved, it is only in exceptional circumstances that the Court will subsequently give leave to a party to re-open the case"?

Question 2: Were the circumstances of this case, where the applicant was a self-represented litigant seeking relief of the utmost seriousness (habeas corpus), exceptional so as to justify the FCA giving leave to the applicant to re-open the case after judgement was reserved?

Question 3: Can it be said that "abuse of process principles can be applied in respect of repeated applications for the issue of writs of habeas corpus within a short time frame"?

Question 4: Does the Habeas Corpus Act 1679 (Imp) still operate in Australia?

Question 5: Does the principle of res judicata apply in respect of the question whether the applicant is presently unlawfully detained?

Question 6: In light of the High Court decision in AJL20, was the applicant's habeas corpus application competent?

Question 7: Is it inappropriate for a court make a costs order against an applicant who failed to obtain the writ of habeas corpus?

The FCA answered those questions as follows:

The remainder of this article is only available to Case Law and Platinum subscribers.

Read our Terms & Conditions and upgrade below:

Monthly Subscriptions

Premium
Basic Content
Premium Content
-
-
$ 29 /month
Subscribe
Case Law
Basic Content
-
Case Law Content
-
$ 49 / month
Subscribe
Platinum
Basic Content
Premium Content
Case Law Content
Save $ 9 / month
$ 69 / month
Subscribe

Annual Subscriptions

Premium
Basic Content
Premium Content
-
Save $ 49 / year
$ 299 / year
Subscribe
Case Law
Basic Content
-
Case Law Content
Save $ 89 / year
$ 499 / year
Subscribe
Platinum
Basic Content
Premium Content
Case Law Content
Save $ 237 / year
$ 699 / year
Subscribe

 

Where GST applies, the above amounts are inclusive of GST.

Content Types

Basic Content includes basic news, some media articles and selected announcements.

Premium Content includes all our content, except for Case Law Content. In other words, it includes Basic Content, plus all our articles on legislative and policy changes, industry updates and the Migration Legislation Tracker.

Case Law Content includes Basic Content, plus case law summaries, analysis and extract, but does not include Premium Content.

Platinum Content includes Basic Content, plus Premium Content, plus Case Law Content. In other words, it includes ALL our content.

If you already have a Case Law or Platinum subscription, click on 'Login' below.

Previous articleNeed to consider claim not accompanied by evidence?
Next articleCl 6.3(5) of Direction 79 interpreted