Plaintiff M1/2021 v Minister for Home Affairs

This matter came before the High Court of Australia as a special case, with Plaintiff M1/2021 represented by Mr R.C. Knowles, QC, and Ms C. Mintz, and the defendant, the Minister for Home Affairs, represented by Mr C.L. Lenehan, SC, and Mr B.D. Kaplan. The central dispute concerned the formulation of the questions of law to be put to the Full Court for its opinion.

The primary legal issue before the Court was the appropriate form and content of the questions of law agreed upon by the parties for determination. Her Honour raised concerns that the proposed questions, as presented in the special case, resembled a set of interrogatories rather than concise, directed questions suitable for the Court's opinion. Specifically, her Honour noted that proposed questions 5 and 6 appeared to be integral parts of, or at least drafted at different levels of specificity to, the originally formed question 1.

Her Honour's reasoning focused on the need for clarity and conciseness in the questions posed to the Full Court. She expressed a preference for questions that were short, directed, and clearly articulated the specific legal issues requiring determination, rather than appearing as a lengthy series of interrogatories. Her Honour directed the parties, particularly Mr Lenehan and Mr Knowles, to confer and revisit the formulation of the agreed questions, with a specific instruction to ensure that question 1 adequately encompassed the issues raised in questions 5 and 6.

Following the discussion, the parties agreed to confer and revise the questions. Mr Lenehan expressed confidence that this could be achieved within the day. The Court indicated that if the revised questions were settled promptly, there would be no need to adjust the existing timetable for submissions and the filing of authorities. The matter was then adjourned to allow the parties to undertake this revision.