Ceylan v The Queen

[1991] HCATrans 342

~

~ -~~

IN THE HIGH COURT OF AUSTRALIA

Office of the Registry

Melbourne No M35 of 1990

B e t w e e n -

SULEYMAN CEYLAN

Applicant

and

THE QUEEN

Respondent

Application for declaration

that solicitor cease to act and

application to strike out for

want of prosecution

DAWSON J

(In Chambers)

TRANSCRIPT OF PROCEEDINGS

AT MELBOURNE ON TUESDAY, 26 NOVEMBER 1991, AT 9.37 AM

Copyright in the High Court of Australia

Ceylan 1 26/11/91

MR A. CAVOLI: If Your Honour pleases, I appear for the

solicitors on the record.	(instructed by Ralph
Lloyd, Sampson)

MR K.G. RIVETT:  I appear for the Director of Public

Prosecutions in this matter. (instructed by the

Director of Public Prosecutions, Victoria)

HIS HONOUR:  Mr Cavoli, I have read the papers and there now

is an affidavit of service and I am prepared to

make the declaration which you seek. That, of course, then has to be served upon your client before he ceases to be your client.

MR CAVOLI: If Your Honour pleases.

HIS HONOUR:  Thank you very much. Now, Mr Rivett, you have

an application to make?

MR RIVETT: Yes, I seek orders that the matter be struck

out for want of prosecution.

HIS HONOUR: There is some little difficulty under Order 69A,

is there not? It is fairly sparse in its

provisions as to what is to be done in a situation

like this.

MR RIVETT: Yes, it is, Your Honour. It seems to apply only

where appeal books have not been served. It

appears to rely on a general discretion to strike

out a matter.

HIS HONOUR:  Faced with a similar situation in Sydney,

Justice Gaudron made an order that application

books be filed and failing the filing of the

application books, the matter be dismissed for want

of prosecution. That would seem to be, not only

because there is a precedent, but because it

follows the rules, that would seem to be a

convenient course.

MR RIVETT: Yes, it would, Your Honour.
HIS HONOUR:	That means that the practice directions are

bypassed but I do not think that matters.

MR RIVETT: That would be a self-executing order.

HIS HONOUR: Yes, that is right.

MR RIVETT: That would be satisfactory, Your Honour.

HIS HONOUR:  Now, Mr Cavoli, as I pointed out, you, strictly

speaking, are still the solicitor acting for the

applicant in the matter, that is the applicant for

special leave. Do you have anything to say?

Ceylan	26/11/91
MR CAVOLI:	I hold no instructions, Your Honour.
HIS HONOUR:	As far as you are concerned, your retainer has

been terminated?

MR CAVOLI: That is correct, Your Honour.

HIS HONOUR:  Very well. The order I propose to make is that

the applicant for special leave to appeal file

seven copies of the application books in the

Melbourne office of the registry by - in view of

the vacation, I think we had better make it

6 January 1992.

MR RIVETT:	6 January, yes, Your Honour.
HIS HONOUR:	In the event that the application books are not

filed by that date the application for special

leave to appeal shall stand dismissed for want of

prosecution.

Is there anything else you need, Mr Rivett?

MR RIVETT:	No, Your Honour.
HIS HONOUR:	And is that satisfactory, the order in that

form?

MR RIVETT: That is satisfactory, Your Honour.

HIS HONOUR: Very well, I make that order.

MR RIVETT:	I will need to serve that upon Mr Ceylan.
HIS HONOUR:	Yes.

MR RIVETT:  I shall do that. Thank you.

AT 9.42 AM THE MATTER WAS ADJOURNED SINE DIE
Ceylan	26/11/91