Johnson v Eastman

The Supreme Court of the Australian Capital Territory, constituted by Spender, Ryan and Stone JJ, considered appeals concerning the power to make "non-removal orders" in relation to a convicted prisoner. The dispute centred on whether the Supreme Court possessed the authority to direct that a prisoner be held at the Belconnen Remand Centre pending the imminent hearing of criminal proceedings in the Court of Appeal, or similar civil proceedings in the Supreme Court or Court of Appeal. The core question was whether such an order was necessary for the administration of justice.

The Court was required to determine whether it had the power to make non-removal orders and, if so, under what circumstances. A related issue was whether the power to make such an order was limited to situations where its non-exercise would lead to the destruction of the subject matter of the proceeding. Furthermore, the Court had to consider the procedural nature of an application to discharge orders made by a single judge exercising the Court of Appeal's jurisdiction, and whether such an application was, in substance, an appeal.

The Court held that it did possess the power to make non-removal orders. It found that the sufficiency of evidence to establish the need for such an order was not a ground of appeal before it. Regarding the procedural issue, the Court determined that an application to discharge an order made by a single judge exercising the Court of Appeal's jurisdiction was, in reality, an appeal, and that any such appeal to the Court from an order of a single judge exercising the Court of Appeal's jurisdiction was incompetent. Consequently, the appeals were dismissed.