Malec v J.C. Hutton Pty Ltd

[1990] HCATrans 116

•

.

~

•

IN THE HIGH COURT OF AUSTRALIA

Office of the Registry

Brisbane No S2! of 1989

B e t w e e n -

JOZE MALEC

Applicant

and

J.C. HUTTON PTY LTD

Respondent

Judgment

MASON CJ
BRENNAN J
DAWSON J
TOOHEY J

McHUGH J

Malec

TRANSCRIPT OF PROCEEDINGS

AT CANBERRA ON TUESDAY, 29 MAY 1990, AT 10. 19 AM

Copyright in the High Court of Australia

C2Tl/l/HS 29/5/90

(Reasons for judgment were delivered)

MR I. HARVEY:  Would Your Honour hear me on a short

submission on costs in respect to that matter?

BRENNAN J:  It may be necessary to constitute the Court in

a way that can deal with that application for costs.

MR HARVEY:  Yes, it may well be the case. The short

submission that I would make is in respect of the

way in which the costs were dealt with in the court

below. At the trial His Honour Mr Justice Kelly

limited the costs awarded to the plaintiff to seven

days of a 10 day hearing. That was not disturbed

by the Full Court but, of course, that would follow

through in the Court's judgment now.

BRENNAN J:  Would it be a satisfactory solution if you were

to put your submission in writing and give copies

to the other side who could then respond?

MR HARVEY: Yes. Thank you, Your Honour.

BRENNAN J:  Do I take it, Mr Solomon, you are appearing for

the other party?

MR D. SOLOMON:  Yes, Your Honour, and I have no instructions

in relation to this.

BRENNAN J:  Well then I think it would be best if the application

for the order was put in writing identifying precisely
what the order is that is sought and notice of that

were given to the other side in writing and then the

other side could reply. The time, however, should

be limited; perhaps seven days for you to put in

your application and seven days for the other party

to reply.

MR HARVEY:  Yes, if the Court pleases.

AT 10.22 AM THE MATTER WAS ADJOURNED SINE DIE

C2T1/2/HS	2	29/5/90
Malec