Lawrance v President, Administrative Appeals Tribunal

Case •

[2005] FCA 1856

•

2 DECEMBER 2005

FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

Lawrance v President, Administrative Appeals Tribunal [2005] FCA 1856

LAWRANCE v PRESIDENT, ADMINISTRATIVE APPEALS TRIBUNAL AND SENIOR MEMBER KELLY AND SENIOR MEMBER ALLEN AND BEV SMITH AND CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER, CRS AUSTRALIA, AND EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, SOCIAL SECURITY APPEALS TRIBUNAL, AND CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER, CENTRELINK, AND PRINCIPLE MEMBER, REFUGEE REVIEW TRIBUNAL, AND SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF FAMILY AND COMMUNITY SERVICES AND HUMAN RIGHTS AND EQUAL OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION

NSD 55 of 2005

LAWRANCE v CRS AUSTRALIA

NSD 909 of 2005

JACOBSON J
SYDNEY
2 DECEMBER 2005


IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

NEW SOUTH WALES DISTRICT REGISTRY

NSD 55 of 2005

BETWEEN:

AROHA LAWRANCE
APPLICANT

AND:

PRESIDENT, ADMINISTRATIVE APPEALS TRIBUNAL
FIRST RESPONDENT

SENIOR MEMBER KELLY, ADMINISTRATIVE APPEALS TRIBUNAL
SECOND RESPONDENT

SENIOR MEMBER ALLEN, ADMINISTRATIVE APPEALS TRIBUNAL
THIRD RESPONDENT

BEV SMITH
FOURTH RESPONDENT

CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER, CRS AUSTRALIA
FIFTH RESPONDENT

EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, SOCIAL SECURITY APPEALS TRIBUNAL
SIXTH RESPONDENT

CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER, CENTRELINK
SEVENTH RESPONDENT

PRINCIPLE MEMBER, REFUGEE REVIEW TRIBUNAL
EIGHTH RESPONDENT

SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF FAMILY AND COMMUNITY SERVICES
NINTH RESPONDENT

HUMAN RIGHTS AND EQUAL OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION
TENTH RESPONDENT

JUDGE:

JACOBSON J

DATE OF ORDER:

2 DECEMBER 2005

WHERE MADE:

SYDNEY

THE COURT ORDERS THAT:

1.The hearing on Tuesday 13 December 2005 be vacated.

2.The matter be set down for hearing on Thursday 16 March 2006 at 10.15 am.

3.The applicant file and serve written submissions on or before Thursday 2 March 2006.

4.The respondent file and serve written submissions on or before Thursday 9 March 2006.

5.The motion be otherwise dismissed.

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

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

NEW SOUTH WALES DISTRICT REGISTRY

NSD 909 of 2005

BETWEEN:

AROHA LAWRANCE
APPLICANT

AND:

CRS AUSTRALIA
RESPONDENT

JUDGE:

JACOBSON J

DATE OF ORDER:

2 DECEMBER 2005

WHERE MADE:

SYDNEY

THE COURT ORDERS THAT:

1.The hearing on Tuesday 13 December be vacated.

2.The Registrar fix an appointment with the parties to settle the appeal papers at a date convenient to the Registry in January 2006.

3.The matter be set down for hearing on Thursday 16 March 2006 at 10.15 am.

4.The applicant file and serve written submissions on or before Thursday 2 March 2006.

5.The respondent file and serve written submissions on or before Thursday 9 March 2006.

6.The motion be otherwise dismissed.

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


IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

NEW SOUTH WALES DISTRICT REGISTRY

NSD 55 of 2005

BETWEEN:

AROHA LAWRANCE
APPLICANT

AND:

PRESIDENT, ADMINISTRATIVE APPEALS TRIBUNAL
FIRST RESPONDENT

SENIOR MEMBER KELLY, ADMINISTRATIVE APPEALS TRIBUNAL
SECOND RESPONDENT

SENIOR MEMBER ALLEN, ADMINISTRATIVE APPEALS TRIBUNAL
THIRD RESPONDENT

BEV SMITH
FOURTH RESPONDENT

CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER, CRS AUSTRALIA
FIFTH RESPONDENT

EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, SOCIAL SECURITY APPEALS TRIBUNAL
SIXTH RESPONDENT

CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER, CENTRELINK
SEVENTH RESPONDENT

PRINCIPLE MEMBER, REFUGEE REVIEW TRIBUNAL
EIGHTH RESPONDENT

SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF FAMILY AND COMMUNITY SERVICES
NINTH RESPONDENT

HUMAN RIGHTS AND EQUAL OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION
TENTH RESPONDENT

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

NEW SOUTH WALES DISTRICT REGISTRY

NSD 909 of 2005

BETWEEN:

AROHA LAWRANCE
APPLICANT

AND:

CRS AUSTRALIA
RESPONDENT

JUDGE:

JACOBSON J

DATE:

2 DECEMBER 2005

PLACE:

SYDNEY

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT

  1. On 3 November 2005 when I gave judgment on two notices of motion brought by Ms Lawrance.  I fixed both matters for hearing on 13 December 2005.  Ms Lawrance was not present when judgment was handed down. 

  2. She complains that she was not consulted about the hearing date and that as a matter of procedural fairness I ought to vacate the hearing date in order to give her an opportunity to file written submissions and she repeats an allegation which has been made on previous occasions that my fixing the matter in the circumstances in which I did amounts to bias. 

  3. I have previously ruled on that.  I would also repeat what I said a few minutes ago, that the matter was before me in open court when the proceedings were listed for judgment on that day and Ms Lawrance in my view was given an opportunity to be here.

  4. In any event I have come to the view that it is appropriate to vacate the hearing dates.  Mr Markus who appears for the fifth to ninth respondents in matter number 55 and for the respondent in matter number 909 does not oppose the vacation of the dates. 

  5. Vacation of the dates is necessary in any event because I propose to hear the two matters seriatim and in matter number 909 the appeal papers have not yet been settled.  I have made directions to enable the registry to settle the appeal papers during January.

  6. Ms Lawrance asks me to suppress her name pursuant to s 50 of the Federal Court Act 1977 (Cth).  She says that there is damage to her reputation resulting from lies told about her.  She says that she has been victimised and that her reputation should not be destroyed by reason of unfounded allegations made against her by people she asserts to be officers of the Commonwealth.

  7. I have previously ruled that it is not appropriate to make an order under s 50 on an interlocutory basis.  I can see no changed circumstances which would warrant the making of an order.  In any event I accept Mr Markus' submission that it is premature to consider such an order.  If Ms Lawrance wishes to press for suppression of names following the final hearing and before delivery of judgment it will be open to her to do so. 

  8. For those reasons, the orders that I will make on the motions filed by Ms Lawrance in both these matters are as I have indicated, that the hearing date will be vacated, however the motions are otherwise dismissed. 

I certify that the preceding eight (8) numbered paragraphs are a true copy of the Reasons for Judgment herein of the Honourable Justice Jacobson.

Associate:

Dated:            16 December  2005

Counsel for the Applicant: The Applicant Appeared in Person
Solicitor for the 1st, 2nd and 3rd Respondents in NSD 55 of 2005: Ms S Leathem
Solicitor for the 5th to 9th Respondents in NSD 55 of 2005: Mr A Markus
Solicitor for the Respondent in NSD 909 of 2005: Mr A Markus
Date of Hearing: 2 December 2005
Date of Judgment: 2 December 2005
Actions
Download as PDF Download as Word Document
Cases Citing This Decision

0

Cases Cited

0

Statutory Material Cited

0