NAPU of 2002 v MIMIA

[2004] HCATrans 194

[2004] HCATrans 194

IN THE HIGH COURT OF AUSTRALIA

Office of the Registry
  Sydney  No S311 of 2003

B e t w e e n -

NAPU OF 2002

Applicant

and

MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION AND MULTICULTURAL AND INDIGENOUS AFFAIRS

Respondent

Application for special leave to appeal

GLEESON CJ
HEYDON J

TRANSCRIPT OF PROCEEDINGS

AT SYDNEY ON TUESDAY, 1 JUNE 2004, AT 2.02 PM

Copyright in the High Court of Australia

NAPU OF 2002 appeared in person.

LAI WAN LEUNG, sworn as interpreter:

GLEESON CJ:   You are appearing representing yourself?

MR S.B. LLOYD:   My instructing solicitor tells me that this applicant is the applicant in the third matter, not the second.  I appear in the second matter for the Minister, perhaps I should also say.

GLEESON CJ:   Just take a seat.  I think your case is on next.  Ms Leung, would you please write the name of your client on that paper that I hand you?

THE INTERPRETER:   Sure, your Honour.

GLEESON CJ:   That will be marked 1 for identification.  The purpose of doing that was simply to ensure that your client, Ms Leung, is the applicant in matter No 3 and not the applicant in matter No 2.  So just take a seat and we will deal with matter No 2 at the moment.  It will be marked 1 for identification and placed with the papers:

MFI-1           Piece of paper with name of the applicant

AT 2.06 PM THE MATTER WAS ADJOURNED
UNTIL LATER THE SAME DAY

UPON RESUMING AT 2.06 PM:

GLEESON CJ:   Yes, you are representing yourself:

NAPU OF 2002:   Yes, your Honour.

MR R.T. BEECH-JONES:   If the Court pleases, I appear on behalf of the respondent.  (instructed by Clayton Utz)

GLEESON CJ:   Would you come to the microphone and speak into the microphone and everything you say will be interpreted by the interpreter.

APPLICANT NAPU OF 2002 (through interpreter):   I have already prepared a written submission.  May I now distribute this?

GLEESON CJ:   Yes, certainly.  Can you give us an opportunity to read this, please?

APPLICANT NAPU OF 2002 (through interpreter):   I also have some supplementary information, your Honour.  Should I provide the Minister’s representative with one?

GLEESON CJ:   Yes.  We have that information ourselves, I think.  Yes, we have read that.  Go ahead.

APPLICANT NAPU OF 2002 (through interpreter):   All my points of argument are set out in the written submission.  Do I have to read them out?

GLEESON CJ:   No, we have read them ourselves, thank you.

APPLICANT NAPU OF 2002 (through interpreter):   That is my case.

GLEESON CJ:   Very well.  Take a seat, please.  We do not need to hear you, Mr Beech-Jones.

We have read the written submissions and further material provided to the Court by the applicant.  The Court is of the view that there are insufficient prospects of success of an appeal to warrant a grant of special leave, and the application is refused with costs.

AT 2.10 PM THE MATTER WAS CONCLUDED