Gamester Pty Limited & Anor v Rural Press Limited

[1991] HCATrans 174

--~

• .

• ~

IN THE HIGH COURT OF AUSTRALIA

Office of the Registry

Sydney No S89 of 1990

B e t w e e n -

GAMESTER PTY LIMITED

First-named Applicant

BARBARA ANN CAMERON

Second-named Applicant

and

RURAL PRESS LIMITED, JOHN

LINDSAY PARKER and TIMOTHY ROY

STARKEY

Respondents

Application to amend

MCHUGH J

(In Chambers)

TRANSCRIPT OF PROCEEDINGS

AT SYDNEY ON MONDAY, 22 JULY 1991, AT 10.17 AM

Copyright in the High Court of Australia

Gamester(2) 1 22/7/91

MR A.S. MARTIN: If Your Honour pleases, I appear for the

respondents who are the applicants in the motion.

(instructed by Sly & Weigall)

HIS HONOUR:	Yes, Mr Martin.
MR MARTIN:	Could Ms Cameron be called outside, and Gamester

Pty Ltd?

HIS HONOUR:	Yes, she may be called three times.
DEPUTY REGISTRAR:	No response, Your Honour.
HIS HONOUR:	Mr Deputy Registrar, you might also call

Gamester Pty Ltd which is also a party.

DEPUTY REGISTRAR:	No response on that call, Your Honour.
MR MARTIN:	Your Honour, I would seek Your Honour's leave to

file in Court an affidavit of service of Karen

Leone Davidson, sworn on 18 July.

HIS HONOUR:  Yes, leave is granted. Might I have that?

Galaway & Co, I take it, is the address for service of the applicants in the special leave application?

MR MARTIN: That is correct, Your Honour.

HIS HONOUR:  Yes, thank you, Mr Martin. Mr Martin, it would

be sufficient for me to say that I will make the

orders in the summons as is proposed.

MR MARTIN: If Your Honour pleases.

HIS HONOUR: Accordingly, I make the orders sought in the

summons, that is, order 1, order 2 and order 3. Is

there anything further?

MR MARTIN: There is one further matter. Your Honour, we

were served with a summons that apparently has been

issued by the applicants. It is dated
18 July 1991.	It does not bear the seal of the

Court nor, indeed, has it been signed by any

Registrar of the Court nor does it contain any

appointment for hearing the summons. There are a

number of affidavits annexed, served in support of
the summons. It simply seeks an order for an

extension of two weeks for the filing of an

affidavit in support of the special leave

application.

HIS HONOUR:  That was dealt with last Monday. I dismissed

that summons.

This is a new summons that has been taken out

since.

Gamester(2) 2 22/7/91

DEPUTY REGISTRAR: Perhaps, Your Honour - when you say,

"taken out", there has been no order actually

issued from the Registry. It may well have been

served upon the respondents but as I understand

it - and I have only returned to duty today - there

is no actual summons been issued from the Registry.

MR MARTIN:  It is merely a summons that has been served on

us bearing no Court seal or execution by the -

HIS HONOUR: It does not bear - - -?

MR MARTIN: It does not bear - - -

HIS HONOUR: Well, you may ignore it.

MR MARTIN:  I thought I would just bring it to Your Honour's

attention in the absence of Ms Cameron.

HIS HONOUR:  Yes, thank you. Anything further?

AT 10.21 AM THE MATTER WAS ADJOURNED SINE DIE

Gamester(2) 22/7/91