Klein v Domus Pty Ltd

[1963] HCA 54

---

(Judgment by: Windeyer J)

Klein
vDomus Pty Ltd

Court:

Judges: Dixon CJ
Mctiernan J

Windeyer J

Case References:
Latter v. Muswellbrook Corp - (1936) 56 CLR 422

Hearing date:
Judgment date: 20 November 1963

---

Judgment by:
Windeyer J

I also agree generally in what the Chief Justice has said. I think we should not interfere with the exercise of the discretionary judgment of the Supreme Court. I would state specifically my agreement with the Chief Justice on one aspect: I am not persuaded of the validity of some of the principles which it is said have guided or should guide the Supreme Court. I do not think that there is a prima facie right to an extension. And I do not understand why it is said that only in a rare case should an extension be refused, unless it be that in the great majority of cases a sufficient ground for an extension is made out. The applicant must make out a case for permission to agitate something that prima facie time has put to rest. The matter is one for the discretion of the Supreme Court.

I should add that I do not think that the words "or that having regard to all the circumstances of the case it would be reasonable so to do" create an alternative to a "sufficient cause" as a ground on which an extension may be sought. I say that because I cannot see how, in the absence of a sufficient cause for extending the time, it could ever be reasonable to extend it. I therefore read those words as explanatory of what is meant by a "sufficient cause" rather than as stating a distinct alternative. They obviously confer a wide discretion.