Plaintiff M47/2018 v Minister for Home Affairs & Anor
Case
•
[2018] HCATrans 246
Details
AGLC
Case
Decision Date
Plaintiff M47/2018 v Minister for Home Affairs & Anor [2018] HCATrans 246
[2018] HCATrans 246
CaseChat Overview and Summary
This matter came before the High Court of Australia, with the applicant, identified as Plaintiff M47/2018, represented by Mr J.W.K. Burnside QC and Ms A.M. Battisson, and the respondents being the Minister for Home Affairs and the Commonwealth of Australia, represented by the Solicitor-General, Mr S.P. Donaghue QC. The proceeding concerned a special case filed by the parties, which the Court was to consider.
The primary legal issue before the Court was whether to refer the special case to a Full Court for hearing. The parties also sought to establish a timetable for the filing of written submissions and other procedural documents, taking into account the applicant's lengthy period of detention and the Court's existing workload.
The Court, acknowledging the applicant's extended detention and the Court's busy schedule, determined that it was critically important for the matter to proceed. The Court proposed a timetable for the filing of submissions, with some adjustments made after discussion with counsel regarding their availability. The defendants indicated that while they did not agree that a specific point to enliven the *Al-Kateb* issue had been reached, they agreed that the material necessary for the Full Court to decide that question was present.
The Court ordered that the special case be referred to a Full Court for hearing. A detailed timetable was set for the filing of the special case book, written submissions by the plaintiff, any interveners, and the defendants, as well as the plaintiff's reply. The defendants were also ordered to file and serve a Joint Book of Authorities. Costs were reserved.
The primary legal issue before the Court was whether to refer the special case to a Full Court for hearing. The parties also sought to establish a timetable for the filing of written submissions and other procedural documents, taking into account the applicant's lengthy period of detention and the Court's existing workload.
The Court, acknowledging the applicant's extended detention and the Court's busy schedule, determined that it was critically important for the matter to proceed. The Court proposed a timetable for the filing of submissions, with some adjustments made after discussion with counsel regarding their availability. The defendants indicated that while they did not agree that a specific point to enliven the *Al-Kateb* issue had been reached, they agreed that the material necessary for the Full Court to decide that question was present.
The Court ordered that the special case be referred to a Full Court for hearing. A detailed timetable was set for the filing of the special case book, written submissions by the plaintiff, any interveners, and the defendants, as well as the plaintiff's reply. The defendants were also ordered to file and serve a Joint Book of Authorities. Costs were reserved.
Details
Key Legal Topics
Areas of Law
-
Immigration
-
Administrative Law
-
Statutory Interpretation
Legal Concepts
-
Judicial Review
-
Jurisdiction
-
Procedural Fairness
-
Standing
-
Statutory Construction
-
Costs
Actions
Download as PDF
Download as Word Document
Cases Citing This Decision
0
Cases Cited
0
Statutory Material Cited
0