Legal Notes

Is this decision by a Judicial Registrar real or a forgery? You be the judge Different types and indications of Forged Documents Here are two examples of decisions by Judicial Registrars of the Federal Court of Australia.  Decision 1 This first example looks authentic and there is no reason to suspect it is not real. Decision of Judicial Registrar M Buchanan - decision dated 18/06/2024  It is signed and has the name of the Judicial Registrar who made the decision typed beneath the signature:     Decision 2 The second example has two obvious differences that make you say “hmmmmm”. Decision by an unidentified Registrar - decision dated 8/07/2024   An image of a signature has been pasted into the salutation.  The name of the National Duty Registrar is not shown. To request a review of any decision, you need to know the name of the decision-maker.  It is unusual to not give the name of the decision-maker. This is one more piece o...

 Documents filed in FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA  COLIN GEORGE DUNSTAN v ROBYN ORR & ANOR  Round 3 In Round 2 the Federal Court of Australia received an application lodged on 23 June 2024, and had not made any decision - to either accept or reject it for filing - 10 days later.  This is an unprecedented delay to make a decision that usually is made in one or two days. The page summarising the state-of-play in Round 2 ended with:  The application refers to a Federal Court of Australia judgment in which the Commissioner of Taxation, coincidentally a respondent in this application, was successful as the applicant in the original jurisdiction of the Federal Court of Australia. The Commissioner of Taxation was allowed to make an application to have decision by the Full Court of the Federal of Australia set aside without lodging an appeal: Leave to appeal is not necessary, and The Federal Court of Australia has the power to grant the relief requested. (Refer to...

 Documents filed in FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA  COLIN GEORGE DUNSTAN v ROBYN ORR & ANOR  Round 2 A Federal Court of Australia Judicial Registrar, Michael Buckingham, rejected an initial application lodged on 16 June 2024, writing: I am satisfied that I should refuse to accept the Application for filing … I note in particular that: the Application fails to state, to the extent it is claimed under a provision of an Act, the Act and the provision under which the relief is claimed in accordance with rule 8.03 of the  Rules. the Application as a matter of form and substance seeks to appeal the decision of Justice Wigney in  Dunstan v Orr (No 2)  [2023] FCA 1536, in circumstances where  the only avenue of appeal is an application for leave to appeal  [sic] in accordance with section 24(1A) of the  Federal Court of Australia Act 1976  (Cth). the Application appears to be an attempt to re-litigate proceedings, whether based on new evidence o...