There were two appeals listed to be heard today in this matter. They were adjourned on 25 September 2008 to today on the application of Mr Chranley for the purposes of him obtaining the relevant transcript. He needed to listen to the tapes, decide which parts of the transcript he wanted to obtain, and then obtain that transcript and file and serve it.
I also made an order on that day that Mr Chranley advise everyone by Wednesday 15 October if he’d been unable to obtain the transcript and whether he would be seeking a further adjournment.
Mr Chranley failed to comply with that order and he failed to attend today. He says that he thought that if he had not obtained the transcript the hearing would not take place today. I do not accept that as an explanation by Mr Chranley but there is little I can do about it today, but there may be quite a bit I can do about it on the next occasion if it ever occurs again. When Mr Chranley did not appear today, Mrs Smart asked for the appeals to be dismissed. If this happens again, that will be an application that is seriously considered by this Court.
Mr Chranley has now attended after he was contacted by telephone. He has explained to me the attempts that he has made to obtain the transcripts, and I accept that. I requested my associate to make some inquires about it as well to see if the process could be assisted in any way by me, and what Mr Chranley has said accords with what my associate has ascertained as to the circumstances. In addition she was able to obtain some helpful information for Mr Chranley and that is that, as I understand it, approval has now been given for Mr Chranley to listen to the transcripts, although as I pointed out to Mr Chranley the two relevant dates are 21 April and 30 April, and not 1 May.
Thus, as I understand it, Spark and Cannon have been advised by the Federal Magistrates Court of that approval. The most expeditious way of proceeding now would be for Mr Chranley to contact Spark and Cannon and make arrangements to listen to those two days of transcript, and proceed from there.
On that basis Mr Chranley applies for a further adjournment of the appeals. Mrs Smart doesn’t consent to but nor does she oppose that application, and I am prepared to grant the adjournment. However, this is the last adjournment that I will allow to enable the transcript to be obtained. Unfortunately I do not have an early date in my diary to re-list this matter and the earliest I can get back to it is the 4 December. However, perhaps a blessing in disguise is that that provides in my view, and confirmed by Mr Chranley, ample time for him to now obtain the relevant transcript that he wants to put before the court in relation to these two appeals.
I should also note that I gave leave to Mrs Smart to file and serve an amended summary of argument. She has done that, although Mr Chranley has alerted me to the fact that he only received his copy yesterday. As I have said that does not concern me. Mr Chranley will now have ample time to consider those submissions if he needs to.