Gibbs v Triscott B52/1996 [1997] HCATrans 248 (15 August 1997)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF AUSTRALIA

Office of the Registry

Brisbane No B52 of 1996

B e t w e e n -

ALAN HARRY GIBBS

Applicant

and

PAUL ANTHONY TRISCOTT

Respondent

Application for special leave to appeal

BRENNAN CJ

DAWSON J

TOOHEY J

TRANSCRIPT OF PROCEEDINGS

AT MELBOURNE ON FRIDAY, 15 AUGUST 1997, AT 9.52 AM

Copyright in the High Court of Australia

BRENNAN CJ: Is there any appearance by the parties in this matter?

The parties have indicated that they desire to rely simply upon the written submissions. The Court has considered those submissions.

This is an application for special leave to appeal from a judgment of the Full Court of the Federal Court dismissing an appeal from the judgment of Mr Justice Drummond refusing to set aside a bankruptcy notice issued by the respondent against the applicant.

The dispute between the parties derives from a claim for legal costs made by the respondent against the applicant which the applicant says were owing by a company of which he was a director, but that is not the judgment on which the bankruptcy notice was based. After an unsuccessful appeal to the Court of Appeal of Queensland from an order made by the District Court, the applicant was ordered to pay the costs. A certificate for costs in the amount of $3,166.86 issued out of the Supreme Court of Queensland on 24 September 1992 and founded the bankruptcy notice.

While the applicant has constantly asserted that, by reason of the claim for costs, he has a right in damages against the respondent based on defamation, malicious prosecution and perjury, he has been unable to persuade the Federal Courts that he has a cause of action capable of prosecution.

We can find no error of principle in the judgment of the Full Court of the Federal Court. The interests of the administration of justice do not warrant a grant of special leave to appeal. To the contrary, after lengthy litigation, it is desirable that special leave be refused. Accordingly, the application must be refused with costs.

AT 9.54 AM THE MATTER WAS CONCLUDED