Coutts v Close, Assistant Commissioner of the Australian Federal Police

[2013] FCA 1310

FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

Coutts v Close, Assistant Commissioner of the Australian Federal Police
[2013] FCA 1310

Citation:	Coutts v Close, Assistant Commissioner of the Australian Federal Police [2013] FCA 1310
Parties:	BRETT COUTTS v LEANNE CLOSE, ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF THE AUSTRALIAN FEDERAL POLICE and COMMISSIONER OF THE AUSTRALIAN FEDERAL POLICE
File number:	ACD 72 of 2013
Judge:	GRIFFITHS J
Date of judgment:	3 December 2013
Catchwords:	PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – oral interlocutory application for an adjournment
Legislation:	Australian Federal Police Act 1979 (Cth) s 28
Date of hearing:	3 December 2013
Place:	Canberra
Division:	GENERAL DIVISION
Category:	Catchwords
Number of paragraphs:	3
Counsel for the Applicant:	Mr F Purnell SC and Ms K Katavic
Solicitor for the Applicant:	Maurice Blackburn
Counsel for the Respondents:	Mr G McCarthy
Solicitor for the Respondents:	Clayton Utz

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
NEW SOUTH WALES DISTRICT REGISTRY
GENERAL DIVISION	ACD 72 of 2013

BETWEEN:

BRETT COUTTS
Applicant

AND:

LEANNE CLOSE, ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF THE AUSTRALIAN FEDERAL POLICE
First Respondent

COMMISSIONER OF THE AUSTRALIAN FEDERAL POLICE
Second Respondent

JUDGE:	GRIFFITHS J
DATE OF ORDER:	3 DECEMBER 2013
WHERE MADE:	CANBERRA

THE COURT ORDERS THAT:

1.The matter be adjourned to 10:15 am on 4 December 2013.

Note:Entry of orders is dealt with in Rule 39.32 of the Federal Court Rules 2011.

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
NEW SOUTH WALES DISTRICT REGISTRY
GENERAL DIVISION	ACD 72 of 2013

BETWEEN:

BRETT COUTTS
Applicant

AND:

LEANNE CLOSE, ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF THE AUSTRALIAN FEDERAL POLICE
First Respondent

COMMISSIONER OF THE AUSTRALIAN FEDERAL POLICE
Second Respondent

JUDGE:	GRIFFITHS J
DATE:	3 DECEMBER 2013
PLACE:	CANBERRA

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT

1. Mr Purnell SC who appears with Ms Katavic for the applicant has made an oral application before me this morning to adjourn the hearing.  We are currently in the second day of a four day hearing which is in the nature of a judicial review.  The basis of the application is that the applicant’s legal team have only recently come into possession of certain materials which are being produced in response to a subpoena which Mr Purnell SC informs me requires further consideration by him and those who support him, with a view possibly to making a further application to amend the further amended originating application.  The material in question relates to seven records of interview, which are recorded on CDs together with written transcriptions of those interviews. 

2. The interviews in question occurred some time ago in respect of various persons who had some involvement in the incident, which has given rise to the complaints which have been made against the applicant which ultimately led to his termination as a sworn Australian Federal Police Officer under s 28 of the Australian Federal Police Act 1978 (Cth).  The material was produced in response to a subpoena which was issued with leave granted by me on 18 November 2013.  The subpoena was returnable last Wednesday, 27 November 2013.  I’m informed from the bar table by Mr McCarthy, who acts for the respondents in this matter, that the CDs of the records of interview were produced informally to the applicant’s solicitors last Monday, 25 November 2013. 

3. Mr Purnell SC points out that it obviously took time to have the recordings transcribed which, on average, are about 30 minutes in length, some longer than that; some shorter than that, in order to assess whether the material was relevant to the case as presented by the applicant. It was not until late last week, apparently, that the written transcripts of those records of interview were made available to Mr Purnell SC and those who assist him.  It is unfortunate in the circumstances that this matter has arisen at this stage, but I am minded to accede to the application to adjourn, which is not opposed by the respondents and give Mr Purnell SC and his legal team a further opportunity to digest the material and if necessary, make a further application to amend the pleadings.  The case is set down for four days.  Counsel have indicated that they are available for an additional day on Friday if necessary.  I am minded to grant the application for an adjournment until 10.15 am tomorrow morning and we can sit longer hours and use Friday if necessary.

I certify that the preceding three (3) numbered paragraphs are a true copy of the Reasons for Judgment herein of the Honourable Justice Griffiths.

Associate:

Dated:       3 December 2013