Conomy, In the matter of

The matter before the High Court concerned an application by Mr. Conomy for an enlargement of time to file a notice of appeal against orders made on 20 March 2019. These earlier orders, made under s 77RN(2) of the Judiciary Act 1903 (Cth), prohibited Mr. Conomy from instituting further proceedings in the High Court relating to specific convictions. Mr. Conomy had lodged his notice of appeal out of time and sought an order to enlarge that time pursuant to rr 2.02 and 4.02 of the High Court Rules 2004 (Cth). The Attorney-General of the Commonwealth was represented by counsel, Ms. Sharp, to consider the appointment of a contradictor.

The primary legal issue before the Court was whether to grant Mr. Conomy's application for an enlargement of time to file his notice of appeal. Ancillary to this, the Court was required to determine the appropriate procedural steps and appointments to facilitate the hearing of Mr. Conomy's summons and any subsequent appeal, particularly in light of his absence from the directions hearing and the potential need for a contradictor to present opposing arguments.

The Court, noting Mr. Conomy's non-appearance and his letter indicating inability to attend, decided to proceed with making directions for the future conduct of the matter. The Court reasoned that it was appropriate to appoint an amicus curiae, consistent with the principles in *Levy v Victoria*, to present any opposing views to those advanced by Mr. Conomy. The Court then made specific orders, including the appointment of counsel to be identified by the Australian Government Solicitor as amicus curiae, to be treated as the respondent for the purposes of Part 44 of the High Court Rules, and setting strict timelines for the filing of submissions and a joint book of authorities.