COLIN GEORGE DUNSTAN v ROBYN ORR & ANOR - Round 2

 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:

1. 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.
2. 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).
3. the Application appears to be an attempt to re-litigate proceedings, whether based on new evidence or not, that have already been litigated: see McDonald v Colbran [2019] FCA 1937.
4. the Application does not properly state any reasonable cause of action and has no prospects of success.
…
I encourage you to seek independent legal advice before filing any further documents with this Court.

Letter from Michael Buckingham, delivered 19/06/2024 - rejecting application lodged 16/06/2024

Following this encouragement to seek legal advice, the applicant revised the application, adding references to the legal advice obtained, and lodged this new version on 23 June 2024:

Form 15 — Originating Application - lodged 23/06/2024

FormNCF1 —Concise Statement - lodged 23/06/2024

Form 16 —Genuine Steps Statement - lodged 23/06/2024

The Federal Court of Australia registry emailed the applicant on 24 June 2024 writing:

"Your lodgement is currently under consideration, you will receive an outcome in due course."

Surprisingly, the Federal Court is thwarting progress of this application by failing to accept it. Ten days after it was lodged, it remains "unprocessed". 

This is an unprecedented method of obstructing a legal proceeding, and unacceptable behaviour by any officer of a court.

Lodgement Screen showing the application has been left "unprocessed"

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 Commissioner of Taxation v Rawson Finances Pty Ltd [2023] FCA 617 at [62] and [57].)

The surprising action by the Federal Court of Australia to obstruct a legal proceeding is described in an email to Commissioner of Taxation's legal representative: Federal Court of Australia's failure to process an application, 3 July 2024.

Further Reading

"150 ATO officials investigated in GST fraud scheme", 13 February 2024

Respondents to the application were responsible for the design, security and operation of the GST system.