Capital Duplicators Pty Ltd & Anor v Australian Capital Territory

[1992] HCATrans 305

IN THE HIGH COURT OF AUSTRALIA

Registry No CS of 1990

B e t w e e n -

CAPITAL DUPLICATORS PTY LTD

and LUHAZE ACT PTY LTD

Plaintiffs

and

AUSTRALIAN CAPITAL TERRITORY

and COMMISSIONER FOR

AUSTRALIAN CAPITAL TERRITORY

REVENUE

Defendants

For judgment

BRENNAN J
DEANE J

DAWSON J

TOOHEY J

Capital(2) 66 15/10/92

GAUDRON J

TRANSCRIPT OF PROCEEDINGS

AT PERTH ON THURSDAY, 15 OCTOBER 1992, AT 9.32 AM

(Continued from 3/3/92)

Copyright in the High Court of Australia

(Reasons for judgment were delivered)

MR A.V. McCARTHY, (instructed by Macphillamy Cummins &

Gibson):  Your Honour, I wondered whether there was

a submission to be made in relation to costs of

that application.

BRENNAN J:	And are you applying for costs?
MR McCARTHY:	I ~pply for an order for costs of that

application on behalf of the plaintiffs.

BRENNAN J: Is there any appearance on behalf of the

respondents?

MR McCARTHY:	Not that I am aware of, Your Honour.
BRENNAN J:	An application for costs cannot be met by the

Court as presently constituted but an application

may be made in writing if lodged with the Registrar

within 7 days, and served upon the opposing party;

the opposing party to have a further 7 days in

which to respond.

MR McCARTHY:  May it please Your Honour, there is one other

matter and that is the future conduct of the

action, and my instructions there are to mention -

and perhaps this could be dealt with in writing to

the Registrar - that the matter be listed in the

next two or three weeks for further directions in

Canberra.

BRENNAN J: Yes. Well, that can be dealt with by an

application for leave.

MR McCARTHY:	May it please the Court.
AT 9.36 AM THE MATTER WAS ADJOURNED SINE DIE

Capital(2) 67 15/10/92