Australian Federal Courts (4 November 2026)

Send us Fan Mail Eight decisions in the Federal Courts edition for Wednesday 4 November 2026: three from the High Court of Australia and five from the Federal Court of Australia, four with Judicial Ledger headnotes. The opening story: receivers caught between competing secured creditors can get directions from the Court only on a legal question, not on commercial prudence, and may sell despite a prior security interest when the statutory conditions are met and the proceeds are held in trust. Then a worked example on extending time to challenge a migration decision, and the registry. The three High Court decisions air at depth in today's Courts of Appeal brief. Commercial Law Desk (opening story). Healey v I'm Organic Pty Ltd, in the matter of AC Invest Hospitality Trading Pty Ltd (Receivers and Managers Appointed) [2026] FCA 1641 (Younan J, 3 November 2026) - JL p. 14. The power under s 424 of the Corporations Act 2001 (Cth) to give directions to a receiver appointed under an instrument is broad but does not extend to pronouncing on commercial prudence; some legal issue of substance, procedure, power, propriety or reasonableness must be raised. A real, not speculative, risk of personal claims from competing secured parties whether or not the receivers sold, and title uncertainty affecting price, justified a direction that the receivers were justified in selling a liquor licence with gaming machine entitlements, on the proviso that the net proceeds be held in trust pending the priority dispute. An order under s 420B is predicated on the absence of the prior secured party's consent and requires each of s 420B(2)(a)-(d); consent need take no particular form, but the Court proceeded cautiously where consent was emailed to a non-party and not communicated to the Court; the receivers were managing controllers with power of sale apart from the prior charge, sale was in the best interests of creditors and the company, and the trust avoided unreasonable prejudice. A non-party cannot apply under r 9.05 of the Federal Court Rules 2011 (Cth) but may seek joinder under r 1.32, the r 9.05 constraints generally applying; a competing secured creditor whose rights could be directly affected was joined. Application granted. JADE Practice and Procedure Desk (a worked example). Razwantee v Minister for Immigration and Citizenship [2026] FCA 1649 (O'Sullivan J, 3 November 2026) - Signal: Illustrative. Extension of time under s 477A(2) of the Migration Act 1958 (Cth): the six-factor checklist from Katoa v Minister [2022] HCA 28; the merits assessment is usually reasonably impressionistic, but a longer or unexplained delay requires a stronger or even exceptional case; solicitor error (wrong-court filing, defective forms) is a partial but incomplete explanation, and each period of delay needs detailed affidavit evidence; Direction 110, para 8.1.2(2)(c): duration of stay has no linear relationship with risk of harm, and formulaic versus genuine evaluative reasoning; s 501(1) and s 501(3A) are separate and distinct powers (Chetcuti [2021] FCAFC 98). No outcome stated in the synopsis. JADE Registry (list only, no outcome stated). Tax Practitioners Board v Ke (No 2) [2026] FCA 1657 (Wheatley J, 3 November 2026) - stay of proceedings. JADE Australian Securities and Investments Commission v ALAMMC Developments Pty Ltd (No 4) [2026] FCA 1658 (O'Sullivan J, 20 October 2026) - winding up. JADE O'Halloran v ABL Financial Pty Ltd [2026] FCA 1653 (O'Bryan J, 30 October 2026) - interlocutory orders. JADE