Monarch Airlines Ltd v The Civil Aviation Authority; Polaris Holding Company v The Civil Aviation Authority; Canadian Airlines International Ltd

[1992] HCATrans 274

IN THE HIGH COURT OF AUSTRALIA

Registry No ca of 1992

a e t w e e n -

MONARCH AIRLINES LTD

Plaintiff

and

THE CIVIL AVIATION AUTHORITY

Defendant

Registry No C9 of 1992

a e t w e e n -

POLARIS HOLDING COMPANY

Plaintiff

and

THE CIVIL AVIATION AUTHORITY

Defendant

Registry No ClO of 1992

Between-

CANADIAN AIRLINES INTERNATIONAL

LIMITED

Plaintiff

and

THE CIVIL AVIATION AUTHORITY

Defendant

Directions Hearing

Monarch 1 25/9/92

DEANE J

(In Chambers)

TRANSCRIPT OF PROCEEDINGS

AT CANBERRA ON FRIDAY, 25 SEPTEMBER 1992. AT 11.17 AM

Copyright in the High Court of Australia

MR D.F. JACKSON, QC: If Your Honour pleases, I appear with

my learned friend, MR A. ROBERTSON, for the

applicant plaintiffs. (instructed by Allen

Allen & Hemsley)

MR D.J.S. JACKSON, QC: If Your Honour pleases, I appear for

the defendant authority in each of the actions.

(instructed by Mallesons Stephen Jaques)

HIS HONOUR: Yes, Mr Jackson?

MR D.F. JACKSON:  Your Honour, in relation to these matters,

we have arrived at an agreement between ourselves

as to the manner and disposition of them. I wonder

if I could indicate to Your Honour what that is.

It is this, that each party make discovery - I am

just putting it shortly for the moment - but that

there be exempted from the discovery on the part of

the defendant at this stage documents falling into

two classes: first, the defendant's computerized

ledger; and secondly, the primary financial

records used to compile that ledger.

Then that each party make discovery within a

period of 42 days from today, the object being,

Your Honour, that the matter come on again for

hearing before a Justice, subject to the	availability of a Justice, in approximately the
first week in December.	On that occasion,

Your Honour, we would hope to be in a position to

do one of two things. One would be to ask the Justice to state a case under section 18; the

other would· be if it were apparent that there were

factual matters which could not be resolved, for

the application for removal to the Federal Court

then to be further considered.

Monarch 2 MR D.F. JACKSON, QC 25/9/92

HIS HONOUR:  I can see no problem with that course,

Mr Jackson. I would though indicate that the fact

that a constitutional question is involved does not

necessarily mean that this Court would take the

view that the matter was properly instituted in

this Court or that the matter should not be

remitted. When I say properly instituted, I mean

in terms of what the Court can cope with.

MR D.F. JACKSON:  Yes, Your Honour, we understand that. The

nature of the issues in the end may be

fundamentally constitutional and we recognize, of

course, the existence of discretion in the Court.

HIS HONOUR:  What I would suggest, rather than do this off

the cuff all round, that if you people can agree on

a form of order, putting what you want about

discovery in the terms you want it, I will then

make that order.

MR D.F. JACKSON:  Thank you, Your Honour.

HIS HONOUR:  It is a matter for you. I will be some little

time in the next matter.

MR D.F. JACKSON: That will only take us five minutes, I

suspect, because we had agreed on the terms of it

before. I wonder if it would be possible for us

perhaps to mention the matter at some stage during

Your Honour's consideration of -

HIS HONOUR:  What I would suggest is that you interrupt the

next matter whenever you are ready.

MR D.F. JACKSON:  Would Your Honour, pursuant to Order 71

rule 62, certify for the attendance of counsel?

HIS HONOUR: Yes. Can you put that on the document you are

about to produce?

MR D.F. JACKSON: Yes, Your Honour.

HIS HONOUR: Are you content with that course?

MR D.J.S. JACKSON:  Yes, Your Honour.

HIS HONOUR: Very well.

AT 11.21 AM THE MATTER WAS ADJOURNED

UNTIL LATER THE SAME DAY

· Monarch 3 MR D.F. JACKSON, QC 25/9/92

UPON RESUMING AT 11.58 AM:

HIS HONOUR:  The matter of Monarch Airlines Ltd and Civil

Aviation Authority can remain in the list but

unless there is some reason why it should be dealt

with in public chambers, I would propose to dispose

of the final order in private chambers.

We will now adjourn.

AT 11.59 AM THE MATTER WAS ADJOURNED SINE DIE

Monarch 4 25/9/92