Giblet v State of Queensland

Case •

[2006] FCA 537

•

9 MAY 2006

FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

Giblet v State of Queensland [2006] FCA 537

CHRISTINA GIBLET and ORS v STATE OF QUEENSLAND and UNITING CHURCH OF AUSTRALIA INC
QUD 300 OF 2005

BEVAN CHONG and ORS v STATE OF QUEENSLAND and UNITING CHURCH OF AUSTRALIA INC
QUD 301 OF 2005

DAVID DOUGLAS and ORS v STATE OF QUEENSLAND
QUD 389 OF 2005

COLLIER J
9 MAY 2006
BRISBANE


IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

QUEENSLAND DISTRICT REGISTRY

QUD 300 OF 2005

BETWEEN:

QUD 300 OF 2005
CHRISTINA GIBLET
FIRST APPLICANT

MARTHA KOOWARTA
SECOND APPLICANT

MAVIS NGALLAMETTA
THIRD APPLICANT

RODERICK YUNKAPORTA
FOURTH APPLICANT

AND:

QUD 300 OF 2005
STATE OF QUEENSLAND
FIRST RESPONDENT

UNITING CHURCH OF AUSTRALIA INC
SECOND RESPONDENT
BETWEEN:

QUD 301 OF 2005
BEVAN CHONG
FIRST APPLICANT

CAMERON EVANS
SECOND APPLICANT

CECILIA WINIFRED LINDON
THIRD APPLICANT

HAZEL SEWTER
FOURTH APPLICANT
AND:

QUD 301 OF 2005
STATE OF QUEENSLAND
FIRST RESPONDENT

UNITING CHURCH OF AUSTRALIA INC
SECOND RESPONDENT
BETWEEN:

QUD 389 OF 2005
DAVID DOUGLAS
FIRST APPLICANT

GREGORY DOUGLAS
SECOND APPLICANT

DAPHANE FOSTER
THIRD APPLICANT

CHRISTINE NED
FOURTH APPLICANT
AND:

QUD 389 OF 2005
STATE OF QUEENSLAND
FIRST RESPONDENT

JUDGE:

COLLIER J

DATE OF ORDER:

9 MAY 2006

WHERE MADE:

BRISBANE

THE COURT ORDERS THAT:

1.The Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Social Justice Commissioner and Acting Race Discrimination Commissioner be granted leave to appear as amicus curiae in the proceedings.

2.Costs of today’s hearing be costs in the proceedings.

Note:    Settlement and entry of orders is dealt with in Order 36 of the Federal Court Rules.


IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

QUEENSLAND DISTRICT REGISTRY

QUD 300 OF 2005

BETWEEN:

QUD 300 OF 2005
CHRISTINA GIBLET
FIRST APPLICANT

MARTHA KOOWARTA
SECOND APPLICANT

MAVIS NGALLAMETTA
THIRD APPLICANT

RODERICK YUNKAPORTA
FOURTH APPLICANT

AND:

QUD 300 OF 2005
STATE OF QUEENSLAND
FIRST RESPONDENT

UNITING CHURCH OF AUSTRALIA INC
SECOND RESPONDENT
BETWEEN:

QUD 301 OF 2005
BEVAN CHONG
FIRST APPLICANT

CAMERON EVANS
SECOND APPLICANT

CECILIA WINIFRED LINDON
THIRD APPLICANT

HAZEL SEWTER
FOURTH APPLICANT
AND:

QUD 301 OF 2005
STATE OF QUEENSLAND
FIRST RESPONDENT

UNITING CHURCH OF AUSTRALIA INC
SECOND RESPONDENT
BETWEEN:

QUD 389 OF 2005
DAVID DOUGLAS
FIRST APPLICANT

GREGORY DOUGLAS
SECOND APPLICANT

DAPHANE FOSTER
THIRD APPLICANT

CHRISTINE NED
FOURTH APPLICANT
AND:

QUD 389 OF 2005
STATE OF QUEENSLAND
FIRST RESPONDENT

JUDGE:

COLLIER J

DATE:

9 MAY 2006

PLACE:

BRISBANE

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT

  1. This is a Notice of Motion whereby the Aboriginal and Torres Islander Social Justice Commissioner and Acting Race Discrimination Commissioner has applied for leave to appear as amicus curiae in these proceedings. The applicants in the substantive matters have supported the Commissioner’s application. The application has been opposed by the first respondent in the substantive matters, the State of Queensland.

  2. I have read the submissions of the parties and I have heard argument this morning. As Brennan CJ pointed out in the Levy v Victoria (1997) 189 CLR 579 at 604-5, the hearing of an amicus curiae is entirely in the court's discretion. Clearly, the court has to be cautious when considering applications by people to be heard as amicus. In the case before me, it seems to me there is a balancing act. Submissions which have been put to me by the Commissioner, in many ways, seem to me to be leaning towards ways in which the Commissioner could benefit, as distinct from which the court could benefit, from appearing as amicus in this case.

  3. Having said that, I do acknowledge and accept the submissions of Mr Hunyor and Mr O'Gorman in relation to the legislative role under s 46PV Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Commission Act 1986 (Cth) played by the special Commissioner in this case. I also accept the submissions which have been put to me concerning the significant legal issues in these proceedings which are likely to arise, and the expertise and experience of the Commissioner, which may be of value to the court. On balance, I think it is appropriate for the Commissioner to be allowed to participate in this litigation in the role of amicus curiae, and I am prepared to make the orders which have been sought in the Notice of Motion.

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

Associate:

Dated:             11 May 2006

Counsel for the Applicant: D O'Gorman
Solicitor for the Applicant: Robert Bax & Associates Solicitors
Counsel for the Respondent: J Murdoch SC
Solicitor for the Respondent: Crown Law
Date of Hearing: 9 May 2005
Date of Judgment: 9 May 2005
Actions
Download as PDF Download as Word Document
Cases Citing This Decision

0