Goryl v Greyhound Australia Pty Limited

This matter concerned proceedings removed from the Brisbane District Court to the High Court of Australia due to constitutional questions. The parties involved were Greyhound Australia Pty Limited (the applicant) and Suncorp Insurance and Finance (the respondents). The transcript records a brief hearing before a Justice of the High Court concerning the preparation of a statement of issues for the case.

The primary legal issues before the court were the form and content of the agreed statement of issues. Specifically, the court raised concerns about paragraph 11 of the statement, which presented a contention rather than a question, and the absence of a reference to section 19 of a relevant Act, which had been identified in the order for removal. The court also noted the absence of counsel for the applicant.

The court expressed dissatisfaction with the state of the statement of issues, indicating that it required clarification and amendment. The Justice agreed with the respondents' counsel regarding the preferred form of raising issues as questions rather than contentions, and insisted on the inclusion of the reference to section 19. The court indicated that the matter would need to be relisted unless counsel could agree on the comments made and submit an amended document. The hearing was subsequently adjourned sine die.