Dimian & Anor v Commonwealth of Australia

[2006] HCATrans 351

[2006] HCATrans 351

IN THE HIGH COURT OF AUSTRALIA

Office of the Registry
  Sydney  No S124 of 2006

B e t w e e n -

RIFAAT GEORGE DIMIAN

First Plaintiff

CHEE KAN KENNETH WONG

Second Plaintiff

and

COMMONWEALTH OF AUSTRALIA

Respondent

Summons for directions

HEYDON J

TRANSCRIPT OF PROCEEDINGS

AT SYDNEY ON MONDAY, 26 JUNE 2006, AT 9.31 AM

Copyright in the High Court of Australia

MR D.F. JACKSON, QC:   If your Honour pleases, I appear with my learned friend, MR M.A. ROBINSON, for the applicants in this matter.  (instructed by TressCox Lawyers)

MR D.M.J. BENNETT, QC, Solicitor‑General of the Commonwealth of Australia:   If your Honour pleases, I appear with my learned friend, MS R.M. HENDERSON, for the defendant.  (instructed by Australian Government Solicitor)

HIS HONOUR:   Mr Jackson, you move on a summons which was filed on 6 June and two affidavits of Andrew Llewellyn Davey which were filed on the same day?

MR JACKSON:   Sworn 2 and 5 June.

HIS HONOUR:   Yes.  All you want this morning is a short timetable, I gather?

MR JACKSON:   Your Honour, my learned friend and I have had some discussions about the future conduct of the matter.  What we had proposed was to endeavour to agree on a rather fuller statement of facts which would set out in shortish form the basis upon which some of the allegations are made and perhaps contested in various respects in the statement of claim with a view then to having an agreed case which could be stated in due course.  What we would really seek this morning I think, subject to your Honour of course, is really simply to have the matter adjourned to enable those discussions to proceed with a view to having it adjourned, say, to some time in the first fortnight in August.

HIS HONOUR:   The Court will be in Canberra in the first week in August and in Adelaide in the second week in August.  Let me just ask the Solicitor something if I may, Mr Jackson.  You do not want the matter remitted to the Federal Court of Australia?

MR BENNETT:   We do not, your Honour.  We support what my learned friend has just said.  The first week in August might be ‑ ‑ ‑

HIS HONOUR:   What Mr Jackson outlined seems to be an efficient way of proceeding.  Would it be desirable to fix some date late in July by which time the agreed facts preparatory to a document which could be used to state a case be agreed or is it safer to leave it in your hands?

MR BENNETT:   Leave it in our hands.  I have a matter before the Full Court in the first week, I think on 1 August, the Victorian WorkCover Authority Case.  It might be convenient to do it on the morning of that case on the 1st.

HIS HONOUR:   Will you be in Canberra that week, Mr Jackson?

MR JACKSON:   Your Honour, it depends whether I have to do the case in the Full Court of the Federal Court on the 2nd.  We will see about that, but the 1st would be satisfactory.

HIS HONOUR:   The only order sought then is that the summons be adjourned to 1 August in Canberra, the point of the adjournment being for the purposes as indicated earlier, and that costs be costs in the cause.

MR JACKSON:   It is perhaps a question that falls directly within the rule but perhaps the costs be costs in the cause.

HIS HONOUR:   That is what will happen to them in the long run.  They could be reserved.

MR BENNETT:   I understand there is no longer any need to certify.

HIS HONOUR:   Correct.  I by consent adjourn the summons to 1 August 2006 in Canberra at 9.30 am and I order that costs of the summons be costs in the cause. 

AT 9.35 AM THE MATTER WAS ADJOURNED
UNTIL TUESDAY, 1 AUGUST 2006