Singh v Khan [2021] NSWCA 281 (19 November 2021) (Brereton JA)


Catchwords:


CIVIL PROCEDURE – Court of Appeal – Objections to competency of appeal – Whether appeal from exercise of cross-vested jurisdiction and so lies only to Federal Court – Whether leave to appeal required

CIVIL PROCEDURE – Cross-vesting – Where appellant became bankrupt after commencing proceedings in Supreme Court – Whether a “matter arising under” the Bankruptcy Act – Distinction from exercise of jurisdiction in bankruptcy – Cross-vesting legislation not intended to require appeals from judgment in a matter arising under a Commonwealth Act to be instituted in federal Court where first instance court not exercising cross-vested jurisdiction – Primary judge was not exercising cross-vested jurisdiction – Cross-vesting legislation not engaged

CONSTITUTIONAL LAW – The Judiciary – ‘Matter’ – Proceedings not owing existence to federal law but stayed by operation of federal law nevertheless constitute a ‘matter’ arising under federal law

APPEALS – Leave to appeal – Whether leave required from declaratory orders – Whether declarations can be interlocutory – Declarations were interlocutory for purposes of leave to appeal – Leave to appeal required – Appellant directed to file application for leave to appeal lest the appeal be dismissed