Background
LFDB, acting without counsel, lodged an application on 24 August 2026 seeking leave to appeal a decision of Jackman J in LFDB v SM (No 9) [2026] FCA 1118. LFDB also lodged a supporting affidavit affirmed that day.
A filings judge directed under r 2.27(f) of the Federal Court Rules 2011 (Cth) that the documents were not to be accepted for filing unless the Court granted leave. LFDB therefore applied under r 2.27A for permission to file them.
The Court’s Holding
Perram J dismissed the application for leave to file without an oral hearing. His Honour was not satisfied that the proposed application for leave to appeal had any prospects of success.
Accordingly, the Court refused LFDB leave to file both the proposed appeal application and supporting affidavit. The decision did not determine the merits of the underlying dispute or any appeal grounds; it determined only that the proposed filings could not proceed.
Key Takeaways
- A filings judge may require leave before documents can be accepted for filing under r 2.27(f).
- An applicant seeking leave under r 2.27A must satisfy the Court that the proposed proceeding warrants being filed.
- Here, the absence of prospects of success was sufficient to refuse leave without an oral hearing.
Why It Matters
The decision illustrates the Federal Court’s power to control filings where a direction has been made under the Rules. A proposed appeal may be stopped at the filing stage when the Court is not satisfied it has prospects of success.