Eastman v Officer in Charge of the Cells Act Supreme Court

This matter concerned an application for a writ of habeas corpus made by Mr D.H. Eastman, who represented himself, directed to the Officer in Charge of the cells at the ACT Supreme Court. Mr M. Rozenes, OC, appeared to assist the Court. The application was initially considered ex parte, as the respondent police did not appear.

The primary legal issue before the High Court was whether to grant an order nisi for the issue of a writ of habeas corpus, which would require the respondent to show cause why the writ should not be made absolute. Mr Eastman sought an order absolute, aiming to telescope the usual two-stage process into a single hearing to save time.

The Court indicated its intention to proceed with a two-step process, commencing with an order nisi. Mr Eastman, having been in custody for a month and lacking access to legal resources, requested an adjournment until 2 pm that afternoon to complete his preparation. He explained that he had been unable to access legal books and complete his research as anticipated due to being brought directly to court without the usual morning transfer to the Supreme Court cells.

The Court granted Mr Eastman's request for an adjournment until 2 pm that afternoon.