Conomy v Maden

[2019] HCATrans 41

[2019] HCATrans 041

IN THE HIGH COURT OF AUSTRALIA

Office of the Registry
  Perth  No P3 of 2019
  No P11 of 2019

B e t w e e n -

JERROD JAMES CONOMY

Applicant

and

CHRISTOPHER MADEN

Respondent

KEANE J
EDELMAN J

TRANSCRIPT OF PROCEEDINGS

FROM BRISBANE BY VIDEO LINK TO PERTH

ON WEDNESDAY, 6 MARCH 2019, AT 11.00 AM

Copyright in the High Court of Australia

MR J.J. CONOMY appeared in person.

KEANE J:   Yes, Mr Conomy.

MR CONOMY:   Good morning, your Honours.  Should I start with my - have your Honours received the interlocutory applications that I made to ‑ ‑ ‑

KEANE J:   We have received your application for special leave in P3 and P11 of 2019, summonses that were filed on – two summonses filed on 22 February and another set on 27 February.

MR CONOMY:   Yes, that is correct, your Honour, so if I could just start with those two summons.  So, the first one was for amendments to both applications as per the proposed document filed with that summons.

KEANE J:   Mr Conomy, you could probably address us on the assumption that we have read all that material and that we are aware of your applications for amendment.  You would probably be more efficient if you just address us, first, on your applications for special leave on the assumption that any amendment that you need or that you want to make – we will assume that it has been made.  So just proceed to tell us why you should get special leave.

MR CONOMY:   Your Honour, I would like to take a different approach if that is okay with you.

KEANE J:   It is up to you, Mr Conomy.

MR CONOMY:   The correct judicial process is to determine interlocutory applications prior to the main application, the obvious reason being that those interlocutory applications can potentially affect what my case is and what needs to be determined and what should not be determined and what is the relevance of ‑ ‑ ‑

KEANE J:   You go right ahead, Mr Conomy.

MR CONOMY:   So I would like to request the proposed amendments be accepted on the grounds that there has been no objection from the respondent.

KEANE J:   We will consider those applications.

MR CONOMY:   Your Honour, in regard to my submissions in relation to the actual application for special leave issue, I seek an adjournment to that, as well as I seek an adjournment for the preparation of the 10‑page submissions in relation to the alleged vexatious proceedings orders.

KEANE J:   Mr Conomy, you have been given the opportunity to put written submissions in.  You have not taken it up.  If you have something worthwhile to say this is your opportunity to say it.

MR CONOMY:   Your Honour, I am just seeking an adjournment.  I have not had a proper preparation.  This has all been brought on me far too quickly and to have those ‑ ‑ ‑

KEANE J:   Mr Conomy, you have been making applications now since October 2016.  If you have a point to make, it is about time you made it.

MR CONOMY:   Well, that is a different application, your Honour, so – this is in relation to ‑ ‑ ‑

EDELMAN J:   What are you seeking an adjournment of, Mr Conomy?

MR CONOMY:   The preparation of the 10 pages in relation to the vexatious proceedings allegations and also the preparation for determination of the final order hearing – of the hearing of the main application.  My – I have got nothing done in the last two weeks; I have got nothing done because, on the one hand I have had to prepare – all this has just been thrust upon me.  Normally, when you make an application for special leave it is, you know, it does not get determined until three months and then all of a sudden, this has all just been thrown on me and then I have got to make 10 page submissions in the same two‑week timeframe.  It is impossible and it is has been quite ‑ ‑ ‑

EDELMAN J:   There was no requirement for you to make 10 pages of written submissions.  It was just an opportunity for you, if you wished to, to put in any written submissions given that all of the material is material that either you had previously filed or material that had been made available to you after decisions of this Court.

MR CONOMY:   And I would like to take up that opportunity to make the 10‑page written submissions, your Honour.  My best approach is to make written submissions and I made this application for an extension of time in one of those summons and – I have had no time to prepare as far as the actual main application.  So that is my position at the moment and I ‑ ‑ ‑

KEANE J:   Mr Conomy, the Court is not disposed to grant you any further time.  If you have a point to make in support of your applications, this is your opportunity to make it.

MR CONOMY:   But there has been no opportunity, your Honour.  That is what I am saying.

KEANE J:   That is your view.  We are ‑ ‑ ‑

MR CONOMY:   There has been no further time ‑ ‑ ‑

KEANE J:   We are of a different view.  You now have an opportunity to give some substance to the applications that you have made for special leave.  It is up to you whether you take that opportunity or not.

MR CONOMY:   Your Honour, I seek an adjournment.

KEANE J:   Well, the application for the adjournment is refused. 

MR CONOMY:   Your Honour, I do not think that is fair.  There is a requirement for the High Court to have respect for my rights to having adequate time to prepare ‑ ‑ ‑

KEANE J:   Mr Conomy, you have been exercising your rights since October 2016.

MR CONOMY:   I have not, your Honour, because I have not had a document filed for two years.

KEANE J:   All right.  We may have to agree to disagree about that.  Your application for an adjournment has been refused.  Do you propose to make submissions to us in support of your application for special leave?

MR CONOMY:   I cannot, your Honour.

KEANE J:   All right.  Do you propose to make ‑ ‑ ‑

MR CONOMY:   I cannot.  I want to.

KEANE J:   Do you propose to make submissions to us in relation to the question whether the Court should make orders under section 77RN(2)?

MR CONOMY:   Your Honour, again, I have no information in regards to – what are the alleged – frequent vexatious ‑ ‑ ‑

KEANE J:   Mr Conomy, you know – you know the applications you have made.

MR CONOMY:   I do not know.

KEANE J:   You have made many applications, the latest of which are these applications for special leave, more than two years after special leave was refused in circumstances where it is incumbent on you, reasonably in those circumstances, to be in a position to defend your position.  Now, do you propose to or not?

MR CONOMY:   To defend my position as far as the vexatious proceedings orders? 

KEANE J:   Yes.

MR CONOMY:   So, your Honour, I have explained that in my summons.

KEANE J:   All right, we have read that.  Unless you have some submissions to make, the Court proposes to consider the various applications you have made and to give its decision in relation to those applications on a subsequent date.

MR CONOMY:   Your Honour, and I just want to reinforce that I do wish to make the submissions and make use of the – but I just have not had an opportunity and I have ‑ ‑ ‑

EDELMAN J:   There is nothing further that you have to say today then, is there?

MR CONOMY:   I cannot, your Honour.

KEANE J:   All right.  The Court will consider your applications and, as I have said, the Court will decide the fate of those applications and the other questions before the Court in due course.

Adjourn the Court, please.

AT 11.09 AM THE MATTER WAS ADJOURNED