Can a Federal Court ruling be delivered if one judge is absent, according to Rule 63?

Question

Accepted Answer

A Federal Court ruling can still be delivered if one judge is absent under Rule 63
Yes. Rule 63 of the Rules of the Federal Court 1995 allows a judgment to be pronounced even if the judges who composed the court, or any of them, are absent. It also permits the judgment of any judge not present to be read by another judge of the Court or by the Registrar.
Rule 63 permits pronouncement despite absence of judges
Rule 63(2) states that the judgment may be pronounced notwithstanding the absence of the judges who composed the Court or any of them. This means the Court can still deliver the ruling even when a judge is not present for the pronouncement.
A judge not present can have their judgment read by others
Rule 63(2) further provides that the judgment of any judge not present may be read by a judge of the Court or by the Registrar. In practical terms, the absence of one judge does not prevent the Court from handling the pronouncement process.
The Registrar gives notice for when the judgment will be pronounced
Rule 63(1) requires that the judgment be pronounced in open Court, either on the hearing of the appeal or at a subsequent time. Notice of any subsequent pronouncement time must be given by the Registrar to the parties to the appeal.
Adjournment or postponement remains within the Court’s discretion
Even though Rule 63 allows pronouncement in the absence of judges, the decision to adjourn or postpone is described as being in the Court’s absolute discretion. In the Federal Court’s discussion of adjournments, the court characterised this discretion as settled law.

Reading history

Hide →

This history is cleared when the page is closed.

Can a Federal Court ruling be delivered if one judge is absent, according to Rule 63?

Loading

Was this article helpful?

Helpful

Not helpful

Report an issue

2

0

0

Share with friends