Fuller & Anor v The Commonwealth Director of Public Prosecutions

This matter came before the High Court of Australia on an application for special leave to appeal. The applicants, Michael John Fuller and Joseph Patrick Cummings, sought to challenge proceedings in the Magistrates Court. The respondent was the Commonwealth Director of Public Prosecutions, and the proceedings also involved Mr Frederick R. Field SM. The Law Society of South Australia sought leave to be heard as amicus curiae.

The central legal issue before the High Court was whether the principle established in *Dietrich v The Queen* (1992) 177 CLR 292, which concerns the right to legal representation at trial, should be extended to committal proceedings. The applicants argued that they were being prejudiced by a lack of legal representation during the committal process, and that this prejudiced them in a manner akin to being unfairly brought to trial without representation.

The applicants contended that a trial, for the purposes of the *Dietrich* principle, should not be confined to the period after a jury is empanelled. They submitted that the committal process, and specifically the filing of an information in a higher court, could be considered the commencement of proceedings that would bring the *Dietrich* principle into play. The applicants sought to argue that the lack of legal representation during committal proceedings rendered those proceedings unfair and potentially prejudiced their ability to have a fair trial thereafter.

The High Court indicated that it would consider the application for special leave, with the amicus curiae to stand by. The applicants' counsel attempted to refer to an affidavit detailing events since a previous stay application was refused, but the Court did not have the document. The argument then focused on the potential extension of the *Dietrich* principle to committal proceedings.