Hastwell, In the matter of an application for leave to issue or file

[2021] HCATrans 174

[2021] HCATrans 174

IN THE HIGH COURT OF AUSTRALIA

Office of the Registry
  Sydney  No S167 of 2021

In the matter of -

an application by HAYDYN HASTWELL for leave to issue or file

GAGELER J

TRANSCRIPT OF PROCEEDINGS

AT CANBERRA BY VIDEO CONNECTION TO SYDNEY

ON THURSDAY, 28 OCTOBER 2021, AT 9.30 AM

Copyright in the High Court of Australia

HIS HONOUR:   I refuse the application for leave to issue or file the proposed application for a constitutional or other writ.  I publish my reasons and I direct that those reasons be incorporated into the transcript.

On 22 September 2021, Mr Haydyn Hastwell lodged with the Registry for filing a document identified as an application for a constitutional or other writ naming this Court and the New South Wales Health Care Complaints Commission as defendants.

Mr Hastwell’s attempt to file the document evidently arose out of his dissatisfaction with the dismissal on 12 August 2021 by Keane and Edelman JJ in Hastwell v Health Care Complaints Commission [2021] HCASL 140 of his application for special leave to appeal from the decision of the Court of Appeal of the Supreme Court of New South Wales in Hastwell v Health Care Complaints Commission [2021] NSWCA 22 dismissing his application for leave to appeal from the decision of Rothman J in the Common Law Division of the Supreme Court of New South Wales in Hastwell v Health Care Complaints Commission [2020] NSWSC 728.

On 23 September 2021, Gleeson J made a direction under r 6.07.2 of the High Court Rules 2004 (Cth), directing the Registrar to refuse to issue or file the document without the leave of a Justice first had and obtained by the party seeking to issue or file the document.

Pursuant to r 6.07.3, by application and accompanying affidavit both filed on 11 October 2021, Mr Hastwell seeks that leave.

These are my reasons for refusing the leave sought.  They are to be read with my contemporaneously published reasons in In the matter of an Application by Haydyn G Hastwell for Leave to Issue or File (S131 of 2021) where the relevant principles of law are set out.

By filing the document identified as an application for a constitutional or other writ, Mr Hastwell would seek either a writ of certiorari directed to this Court quashing the decision of Keane and Edelman JJ or a writ of mandamus directed to this Court compelling the grant of his already dismissed application for special leave to appeal and the hearing of his appeal.

The document, if filed, would amount to an application for a writ of certiorari or of mandamus directed to this Court.  The relief sought would fall outside the jurisdiction of the Court.  The leave he seeks must therefore be refused.

AT 9.31 AM THE MATTER WAS CONCLUDED