Giniotis v The Director of Planning

[1988] HCATrans 333

IN THE HIGH COURT OF AUSTRALIA

Office of the Registry

Sydney No S97 of 1985

B e t w e e n -

ALFONSAS GINIOTIS

Applicant

and

THE DIRECTOR OF PLANNING

Respondent

Application to dismiss for

want of prosecution

GAUDRON J

(In Chambers)

Giniotis

TRANSCRIPT OF PROCEEDINGS

AT SYDNEY ON FRIDAY, 16 DECEMBER 1988, AT 10.46 AM

Copyright in the High Court of Australia

SlT3/l/RB 1 16/12/88

MR K. CHAPPLE: If Your Honour pleases, I appear for the

Director in this matter. (instructed by

David G. Brigden)

MRS A. GINIOTIS: I apologise to this honourable Court for

my appearance without barrister but circumstances

arise that I should represent today on my affidavit.

HER HONOUR:  I am sorry, you seek an adjournment today, did

you say?

MRS GINIOTIS: Yes, I apologise for appearance without

barrister.

HER HONOUR:	Yes, thank you, that is understood.
MRS GINIOTIS:	And also I apologise for respondent legal people

that this has happened but circumstances arrive that

I should represent today my affidavit and introduce reasons why I should ask this Court honourable to

adjourn matter which I introduce in my affidavit.

MR CHAPPLE:  I do not know whether it assists, Your Honour,

but when we arrived at Court this morning Mrs Giniotis

handed me an affidavit which, I think, she has a copy

of - - -

HER HONOUR:	Yes, I also, a copy has been filed.
MR CHAPPLE:	I am sorry, Your Honour, I did not -
HER HONOUR:	A copy was filed in the Registry this morning.

You say you have been unable to find a document

that is necessary for the - - -

MRS GINIOTIS:	At present it is in Attorney-General what I was informed by Premier office that - - -
HER HONOUR:	The document is not there.
MRS GINIOTIS: It is investigation missing exhibits from

supreme court file which very important connected

with this case.

HER HONOUR:  Mrs Giniotis, that is only a reason for an

adjournment if that is a document relevant to this
appeal.

MRS GINIOTIS:	Yes.
HER HONOUR:	Now, I have read your affidavit and this is an

appeal from the Court of Appeal of New South Wales

from a decision of Mr Justice Cripps of the Land

and Environment Court. You understand that?

MRS GINIOTIS:  Yes.

S1T3/2/RB	2	16/12/88
Giniotis

HER HONOUR:  Now, the document you say is lost was one that,

according to you, was an exhibit in other proceedings,

namely proceedings before Mr Justice Wootten in the

Equity Division of the Supreme Court of New South Wales.

Is that not correct?

MRS GINIOTIS: Also was in Land and Environment Court the

document was represented.

HER HONOUR:  All right. Now, one of the letters on the file

says that there is a copy of that document in the

Land and Environment Court.

MRS GINIOTIS:  No.

HER HONOUR:  Yes, Mrs Giniotis. One of the letters attached

to your affidavit, the letter from Mr Sheehan dated

18 April 1985 says; the second last paragraph:

The Chief Executive Officer further informs

me that there appears to be a copy of a

contract dated 25 February 1972 in the

Land and Environment Court.

MRS GINIOTIS:  Your Honour, not that - was two contracts.

Original contract was different date on which purchasers request for specific performance contract in the court by order which are attached order on the 22nd - - -

HER HONOUR:  Have you been to the Land and Environment Court?

MRS GINIOTIS: Yes, and also documents was with subpoena from

supreme court equity division proceedings was

subpoena to Land and Environment Court and only on

subpoena but in that court was not represented

exhibit A which dated 25 -

HER HONOUR:  If it was not in those proceedings it is not

relevant to your appeal. If it was not an exhibit in

the Land and Environment Court it is not going to be

a matter of any concern on the appeal.

MRS GINIOTIS:  Was in court.

HER HONOUR: That does not matter.

MRS GINIOTIS:  But was not represented only with subpoena, not

represented by parties because was as exhibit from

equity court with subpoena called to Land and

Environment Court, only on subpoena.

HER HONOUR:  Mrs Giniotis, if it was only on subpoena and

not referred to in the Land and Environment Court

how can it possibly be of any relevance to this

appeal?

SlT3/3/RB	3	16/12/88
Giniotis

MRS GINIOTIS:  Because in the equity division, supreme court,

was cancelled that contract which in that contract

was referred that we not responsible for tax

contribution or any tax and on that day was entered

a new fresh agreement on which parties agreed which

say on 22 October 1981 in orders that purchasers

responsible and indemnified ..... with tax and we will

be not responsible - - -

HER HONOUR:  How is it relevant to an appeal to this Court

from the Court of Appeal dismissing an appeal from an

order of Mr Justice Cripps if the document was not

an exhibit in the proceedings before Mr Justice Cripps?

MRS GINIOTIS:	As in Land and Environment - - -
HER HONOUR:	We are only ultimately - any appeal you seek to

make to this Court is concerned only with what was

done by Mr Justice Cripps. It is not concerned with

what happened before Mr Justice Wootten. It cannot

be concerned with what happened before

Mr Justice Wootten.

MRS GINIOTIS:  Your Honour, I understand - it is important why

important because was marked in supreme court as

exhibit and -

HER HONOUR:  Before Mr Justice Wootten, not before

Mr Justice Cripps.

MRS GINIOTIS:	No, but was -
HER HONOUR:	Was it tendered as an exhibit before Mr Justice Cripps?
MRS GINIOTIS:	No, with subpoena all file was referred to

Land and Environment Court and in that court was

affidavit referred a different document, not that

document, and in the other document was said that
we responsible for tax which we have evidence from

Land and Environment - - -

HER HONOUR:  You still do not answer my question .. Unless this

document was an exhibit before Mr Justice Cripps or

it was tendered before Mr Justice Cripps and he held
it to be an inadmissible document, it will not bear
upon the correctness or otherwise of Mr Justice Cripps'

decision which is the only issue that will come before

this Court. There is nothing you can do in this

appeal that will agitate any issue other than the

correctness of Mr Justice Cripps' decision.

MRS GINIOTIS:  I understand, Your Honour. Now, before

Justice Cripps was - - -

HER HONOUR:  And in fact this Court will not accept anything

that was not before the Court of Appeal. You must

have prepared your documents to make an appeal to the

Court of Appeal.

SlT3/4/RB	4	16/12/88
Giniotis

MRS GINIOTIS: Honourable Court, I want only say that we

in supreme appeal court lost appeal because we have

no proof in court about that exhibit when whole file

from equity court was missed that exhibit and was

not represented in court appeal and when court appeal

say that it is not enough evidence for us to be

represent because first was not proper prepared

documents, second, was we have not evidence with this

exhibit proof that was that document and was cancelled

in court before Justice Wootten.

HER HONOUR: Is there another copy of the document anywhere

in existence?

MR CHAPPLE:  We were unaware of the document at all until

this morning when it was mentioned to us, Your Honour.

Obviously because it was a minute or so before Court

began, we have not had any opportunity at all to go

through the department's files. My instructing

solicitor has just handed me a note of her conference

at the settling of the appeal books and there is no
mention of that document there at all. That is as

far as we can take the matter at the moment,

Your Honour. We just were unaware of it.

MRS GINIOTIS:  Your Honour, in my affidavit - - -

HER HONOUR: Mrs Giniotis, you tell me, have you got another

copy of this document?

MRS GINIOTIS:  We have not because was in.the court marked

as exhibit and tendered in the court on 22 October

when was cancelled and said - - -

HER HONOUR:  Have you got another copy at all? Did you have

solicitors acting for you in that matter?

MRS GINIOTIS:	Was acting for us legal aid on that day.
HER HONOUR:	Have you asked them have they got a. copy?

MRS GINIOTIS:  They refuse now - they refuse show to us

all file why we was - - -

HER HONOUR:  Have you asked them if they have a copy of the

contract?

MRS GINIOTIS:  We ask it several times in office legal aid

but they refuse and for that was present time in

Premier office all this matter.

HER HONOUR:  Mrs Giniotis, you are not answering my question.

Have they denied that they have got a copy of the

document?

MRS GINIOTIS: That document they deny because they said in

the court marked as exhibit and they - - -

SlT3/5/RB	5	16/12/88
Giniotis

HER HONOUR:  Did you ask them if they have a copy, not if

they have got the document, if they have got a

copy?

MRS GINIOTIS:  No, they have not copy, they have only the

other document, different date, but this - - -

HER HONOUR:  Was there a barrister appearing for you on that

occasion?

MRS GINIOTIS:	Yes.
HER HONOUR:	Have inquiries been made to see if he has a copy

or she has a copy?

MRS GINIOTIS:	I have not opportunity- - -
HER HONOUR:	Have inquiries been made of the solicitors who

acted for the other side, United Markers.	Have
inquiries been made of them?

MRS GINIOTIS:  Yes, Your Honour, in letter Attorney-General in

my affidavit on - - -

HER HONOUR:  It is not the Attorney-General's job to go

making inquiries of this nature, Mrs Giniotis.	You
have filed a proceeding in this Court many, many,

many months ago. At the last minute you have come

here saying you cannot proceed because you have not

got a document, but you do not make an affidavit

suggesting that you have made inquiries in all - I

mean, first of all it is not obvious that the document

is in any way relevant to the issue, but secondly, you

do not suggest that you have made inquiries in the

places where there might be a copy of it.

MRS GINIOTIS:  Your Honour, why I was appeared to Premier office

at - - -

HER HONOUR:	It has got nothing to do with the Premier.
MRS GINIOTIS: - - -because I have no answers from officers

which I can - from legal people I cannot get help. From court also I have correspondence. I wrote to

Chief Justice when was that time and made inquiry and asked assistance and they referred in Attorney-

General office that no such contract tendered was in

file when, on present time, in letter which are

attached to this my affidavit Attorney say that

Attorney office make inquiry in legal office which

purchasers deny that was - - -

HER HONOUR:  That contract that you say is lost was made with

a company called United Marker. Have you inquired

of United Marker to see if it has a copy of that

contract?

SlT3/6/RB	6	16/12/88
Giniotis

MRS GINIOTIS:  No, they deny at all- - -

HER HONOUR: Well, you have not put any of that material on

affidavit in any event.	Have you inquiried of
their solicitors?

MRS GINIOTIS:  They deny - - -

HER HONOUR: United Marker's solicitor.

MRS GINIOTIS:  - - -because ask appeal they want to change

situation and they want we responsible for tax and

for that they deny but I have their letters which

clear say, for example, this purchaser's solicitor,

Hellier's office on 6 Junel982 clear say, "Because

concract 25 February 1972 was cancelled in the court

and we need authority, a revoke of authority from

owner's property." They, accept - agree also in Land

and Environment letter 8 December 1981 clear say,

" ..... December 1972 contract was exist" but now

they deny and do not put those document - - -

HER HONOUR:  Is there a copy? Was there a copy made? I am

not interested in the original.

MRS GINIOTIS: It could be for that we cannot put all proper

documents in High Court prepared because when I get

legal person advise he said, look, nobody going

prepare, ·you must go to authorities and ask investigate

because this contract is important. In that contract

we not responsible - - -

HER HONOUR:  I still fail to see how it is relevant if it has

been cancelled.

MRS GINIOTIS:  Cancelled but they in affidavit which was

after, later was made orders against us that we was

responsible in that contract. For that they demand

orders against us and pay tax and collect from us

$24,000 from contract.

HER HONOUR:	The orders-at the end of the day we are concerned only with the orders of Justice Cripps.
MRS GINIOTIS:	But in court Land and Environment that time was

documents all called in present Justice Cripps see

all file what situation by subpoena. When I want

copy from them because was sent as exhibit, when I

want copy get they said we sent back because those

documents belongs to supreme court equity division

and was only on subpoena called, not represent

parties. But our situation is that we are not

responsible for tax and we only have this proof because

in that contract clear say that - - -

HER HONOUR:  But that contract has been cancelled.

SlT3/7/RB	7	16/12/88
Giniotis

MRS GINIOTIS: Cancelled but included in fresh agreement.

HER HONOUR:  Yes.

MRS GINIOTIS: In fresh agreement on the same conditions,

mostly in regard - - -

HER HONOUR:	You have got the fresh contract?
MRS GINIOTIS:	Yes.

HER HONOUR: Well, why is that not sufficient for you?

MRS GINIOTIS:  Because on that day in order in my affidavit

here clear say that was cancelled and in fresh

agreement and was signed in court and company

responsible for that tax.

r3 HER HONOUR: It is the fresh agreement, then, that you rely

on.

MRS GINIOTIS:	Yes, but next - - -
HER HONOUR:	And there is no trouble in getting that document.
MRS GINIOTIS:	But next order- - -
HER HONOUR:	Is there any trouble in getting that document,

the fresh agreement?

MRS GINIOTIS:  No, not the - - -

HER HONOUR: Have you got a copy of the fresh agreement?

MRS GINIOTIS:  Your Honour, we have fresh agreement but .next

order in 1982 company demand and change - they ask

court order to be changed to be not responsible for

them for the tax and they referred in affidavits in

equity court that they not responsible before and

referred in first contract that we was responsible.

In first contract was we not responsible and - - -

HER HONOUR:  They did not do that before Mr Justice Cripps,

did they?

MRS GINIOTIS:  Those documents was - I believe that Judge Cripps

was in court land environment and he saw those

documents. I did not see those documents because I

not allowed to because was with subpoena and I

cannot get copies from those, but - - -

HER HONOUR:	You can, did you say? You can or you cannot?
MRS GINIOTIS:	I cannot because those documents - - -
HER HONOUR:	You cannot get copies from whom?

S1T4/l/RB	8	16/12/88
Giniotis

MRS GINIOTIS:  From subpoena documents which was represented

in court.

HER HONOUR:  Have you been down to the Land and Environment

Court to see what documents they have got?

MRS GINIOTIS:  I was a few times and they have nothing. They

made clear that documents was sent - - -

HER HONOUR:  This letter says they have something. The letter

you have annexed to your affidavit says they have

something.

MRS GINIOTIS: They have only transcript and orders, judgment,

orders, I have those copies, but this important

exhibit which we are not responsible was and after -

HER HONOUR:  Was the first contract made one day and the

second contract made the same day, was it, a fresh

contract made - - -

MRS GINIOTIS:	Old contract was cancelled.
HER HONOUR:	Yes, but when was t~e cancelled contract made,

when?

MRS GINIOTIS:	22 October 1981 in equity court.
HER HONOUR:	You say the first contract that was later

cancel.led was made on 21 Octoberl981.	Do you say
that?

MRS GINIOTIS: Contract first, old contract, was signed by

parties and c0mpany in 1972.

HER HONOUR:	On what date?
MRS GINIOTIS:	25 February 1972.

HER HONOUR: All right. When was the second contract made?

MRS GINIOTIS:  Company call us to court, equity court, and

they want cancel that old contract and entered in

fresh new contract.

HER HONOUR:  Yes. Now, would you listen to my questions please,

because you are not answering them.	When was the
second contract made, the date?

MRS GINIOTIS:  On the same day, 22 October, in court and

signed - - -

HER HONOUR:  22 October 1981. Now, Mrs Giniotis, it is said

in this letter from Mr Sheehan of 18 April 1985 that

what purports to be a contract dated 25 February 1972

under the common seal of United Marker Pty Limited

is in the file of the Land and Environment Court.

This is the document you have given me.

SlT4/2/RB	9	16/12/88
Giniotis

MRS GINIOTIS:	They referring and should be there but was not in the court file when I appeared and - - -
HER HONOUR:	You say nothing about that in your affidavit.

Absolutely nothing. And you say nothing about it

in your letters which have got nothing to do with

this case but all your letters that are annexed to
this affidavit say nothing about your having gone to
the Land and Environment Court and the document not

'being there.

MRS GINIOTIS:	Your Honour, I apologise for maybe- - -
HER HONOUR:	Yes, and you should, because many, many months and not one step has been done to comply with the
rules of this Court, not one thing; not one attempt to take out an appointment to settle the books, not
one attempt to file appeal papers, without the docUID=Ilt.
Not one step, and after man~ many,many months you say you have not done it because you cannot find this document and you make no attempt to explain either why the document is necessary or why a copy cannot be
obtained or what steps you have taken at the Land and
Environment Court.
MRS GINIOTIS:	Your Honour, I apologise, not only for this errors which I provide here but also for my poor
English, but I am in this situation that in this
my affidavit clear I referring why we appeal because Land and Environment Department clear say in this
document that we not responsible.
HER HONOUR:	The Land and Environment Court not the - - -
MRS GINIOTIS:	I am sorry, Department of - State Planning

Authority.

HER HONOUR:  Mrs Giniotis, that may or may not be the situation

when we come to tr..e question of your appeal. At the

moment you have not filed any papers. Now,·what we

are concerned about is this: the Director of Planning

wants your appeal struck out because you have filed

no papers, none of the necessary papers.

MRS GINIOTIS:  I apologise, but this letter on 3 November still

I must wait from investigation- - -

HER HONOUR:  You must not wait, you must file some papers.

There are other papers to be filed. When the other papers are assembled it may become obvious that the

contract is not necessary. On the other hand, it may

become obvious that it is and then other attempts can

be made to find copies. But this Court cannot wait

around the result of inquiries with ministers and

premiers which are not even confined to this issue.

SlT4/3/RB	10	16/12/88
Giniotis

The place to make your inquiries as to that

contract, if you need a copy of that contract, are

clear. You inquire in the supreme court, in its

equity court, in the Court of Appeal of the supreme

court; you make inquiries in the Land and Environment

Court, you make inquiries of the solicitor and the

barrister who acted for you before Mr Justice Cripps

and Mr Justice Wootten, and you make inquiries of the

solicitors who acted for United Marker. They are the

inquiries, they are the places you make inquiries for

such a document. It has got nothing to do with the

Premier.

MRS GINIOTIS:  Your Honour, I was, I pass those offices and

on that day - - -

HER HONOUR:	You do not ask the Premier to do anything about those offices.
MRS GINIOTIS:	Your Honour, on that day in Land and Environment

Court, we not make application; we was called by

subpoena to that court and this is what start all- - -

HER HONOUR:  And the last known record of those documents is

at the Land and Environment Court and the letter

from Mr Sheehan that you got - when you got three

and a half years ago a letter from Mr Sheehan - that

is how old this is - a letter from Mr Sheehan saying

that the Chief Executive Officer said that the

documents were then in the file of the Land and

Environment Court.

MRS GINIOTIS:  But when I appeared to get copy they made

clear they had not because they was in the property

equity supreme court file.

HER HONOUR:  Is there any reason other than the document,

the absence of this document, why the appeal should

not be struck out.

MRS GINIOTIS:  I want say that we was not responsible for

that tax.

HER HONOUR:  That is to do with the appeal if it is ever

heard. The question is, is there any reason why the

appeal should not be struck out for your not having

filed the papers necessary for it to proceed, other

than this missing document?

MRS GINIOTIS:  Your Honour, I have no opportunity the other,

only ask to be not struck out, to be give me

opportunity now because I see - - -

HER HONOUR:  You have had three years opportunity, three and

a half years.

SlT4/4/RB	11	16/12/88
Giniotis

MRS GINIOTIS:  But I waiting from they office, now present

time I waiting from much answer still on 3 November

and still I cannot get answer because I cannot get
access to file people who represent us in court.

People who - - -

HER HONOUR:  I am sure that if you had taken steps to get

your papers in order, the fact that the document
was reouired in tr.is Court would be sufficient to

disclose its whereabouts and make it available. But

you have not even taken the steps to file the documents

in the Court.

MRS GINIOTIS: Your Honour, I am not legal person. Because my

husband not well, only for him, for my family I doing

this. I not legal person and if I appear to legal

office and I pay to them $3000 and asking to be made
investigation and solicitor collecting from my hand

$3000 and say that after th.ree, four months that he

cannot do t:b..is. Go by self and ask because this is

legal office represent us and in they hands file, when

I appear in legal office they said I must go to

private solicitor and private solicitor have no

access to our file which was made in court, equity

court, made order - contract for specific performance

and we still have no all documents see since 1981

and why I ask - I know a lot of people upset because

I - I was sent to Premier office because it was closed

door to be not allowed see me that file.	Because I
ask my husband - - -

HER HONOUR:  Mrs Giniotis, you have not attempted to file any

of the documents. The papers that are necessary, ,in

essence, are the papers that were before Justice Cripps

and the papers that were before the Court of Criminal

Appeal. Now, that is what is necessary. You have

made no attempt to have those copies and produced

to this Court.

MRS GINIOTIS:  Your Honour, I apologise because really I

waiting, I cannot prepare what legal people say. I

cannot ask Registrar court because this is not their

duty assist me. I need legal person, but legal

person clearly say that I must first find exhibit.

Without exhibit we have no choice go to court.

And for that this time I apologise respondent's

legal people really for this today and all this time

but we are only, you know, ordinary people. We not dealing with constitution, with law books every day

and we do not know really which ways we should go.

I apologise this Court and I only can ask little time because now I see what is wrong. Every time when I appear I see what is wrong, what Court needs, and every

time I learn something. Because now I see what

Your Honour introduce me that I should this, that

wrote in affidavit. But if lawyer keep documents week

and yesterday 1.30 give me answer that they not going

SlT4/5/RB	12	16/12/88
Giniotis

prepare for me this affidavit and after 2 o'clock

I must run looking some lawyer to be sure-

HER HONOUR:	That is a different matter altogether, Mrs Giniotis.
MRS GINIOTIS:	I know, this is what cause all this mess,

because everything it is not in order. For us, not

enough knowledge, for documents which we should get

because our part is those documents and file which

lawyers represent us we should get because this .....

represent us in 1981 and we cannot see file, refuse

to us file see.

HER HONOUR:	Do you have anything to add?
MRS GINIOTIS:	Your Honour, I only ask today at least short

time, I must do what I heard today in this Court.

I must work with this way and get this what is

important for this Court valuable documents and

this files what I heard now that I must get and put

in order to legal people and ask to be prepared

proper documents.

HER HONOUR:  You have not got anyone acting for you?

MRS GINIOTIS: Present time, no, because no one legal private

lawyer want deal with this file. We do not know what

it is in that file legal office, that no one private

lawyer was try get this file and see access this file.

Everyone sends me there, look and get.

HER HONOUR:  Mrs Giniotis, you know that the application

cannot proceed unless you are represented, you are

legally represented?

MRS GINIOTIS: Yes, but I spoke with some legal people. They

agree represent if I bring documents which it is

necessity for our success in court; otherwise say no

point,is waste of time and go for dismissal this our

case if we not get proper prepared document.

HER HONOUR:  Very well. Is there anything else you wish to say?

MRS GINIOTIS:  I only ask to accept respondent today to be

little give me time and I go to look at this case

in proper legal manner.	Thank you very much,
Your Honour.

HER HONOUR:	Mr Chapple.
MR CHAPPLE:	Your Honour, the Director's position is fairly

straightforward. The Director is anxious to have the

matter resolved obviously. Obviously the Director

does not want to be seen in the position of

disadvantaging Mr Giniotis. Could I ask Your Honour

to consider the alternative matter in the surmnons

may be more appropriate, allowing 14 days or some

S1T4/6/RB	13	16/12/88
Giniotis

other period that Your Honour deems appropriate.

HER HONOUR:  Mr Chapple, is there any possibility that the

Department has got a copy of this document?

MR CHAPPLE:  That is unknown, Your Honour. Obviously the

Department will make whatever inquiries should be done. There are voluminous files, Your Honour.

HER HONOUR:	Do you know precisely what document it is?
MR CHAPPLE:	We are clear on dates and the type of document

it is. We are unclear in the sense that it has

never been presented as far as we are aware, but

certainly I spoke with my instructing solicitor

outside the Court immediately that was mentioned

and there are files and they will be gone through,

Your Honour.

HER HONOUR:  A copy will be sufficient.

MR CHAPPLE: Certainly, Your Honour.

HER HONOUR:	There is some suggestion here that Helliers, Solicitors, may have had it at some stage. I am
looking at the letter annexure E from Mr Dowd.

MR CHAPPLE:  Yes. Could I say this, Your Honour. Just on

some of the matters that have been mentioned this

morning, Your Honour, we are - not just unclear,

there has been a mention by Mrs Giniotis that legal

aid was provided for at the earlier proceedings

whereas my solicitor has just brought to my attention

a letter from the Australian Legal Aid Office which

says the contrary to that.

HER HONOUR:  The Australian Legal Aid Office was not the only

legal aid organisation in those days.

1. MR CHAPPLE: Certainly, Your Honour. If Your Honour was to

allow a further period, obviously the Department

would undertake to make whatever inquiries it can.

Certainly to go through its files and, as I said,

Your Honour, there was no mention whatsoever to us

prior to this morning of the need for this document

and so, obviously, no search has been conducted for

it prior to today.

HIS HONOUR:  What I am minded to do is to stand this matter

over until 13 January. At that stage I would expect,

Mrs Giniotis, that you would have compiled all the

documents that you believe are relevant and I would

hope that the Department might be in a position to

assist about the missing document.

MRS GINIOTIS:	Thank you, Your Honour.
HER HONOUR:	But if you have not taken steps within the

SlTS/1/RB	14	16/12/88
Giniotis

Registry to have all necessary document assembled

the matter will be struck out on 13 January.

MRS GINIOTIS:	Thank you very much, Your Honour.
HER HONOUR:	Now, if steps have not been taken it will be

struck out.

MRS GINIOTIS:	I understand.
HER HONOUR:	Now costs, Mr Chapple.
MR CHAPPLE:	Your Honour, we would ask for costs for today.

We are concerned about appearance, indeed, on the

next occasion. We are unsure what will happen on the

next occasion. Would Your Honour order costs for

today?

HER HONOUR:	I will reserve costs for today, yes.
MR CHAPPLE:	As Your Honour pleases.
MRS GINIOTIS:	Thank you very much, Your Honour.
HER HONOUR:	You understand. All those steps must be taken because otherwise it will have to be struck out.

MRS GINIOTIS:  Thank you, Your Honour. I apologise this

Court.

HER HONOUR:  Court will now adjourn.

AT 11.29 AM THE MATTER WAS ADJOURNED

UNTIL FRIDAY, 13 JANUARY 1989

SlTS/2/RB	15	16/12/88
Giniotis