Plaintiff S164/2018 C v The Honourable James Joshua Edelman Justice of the High Court of Australia
[2019] HCASL 130
PLAINTIFF S164/2018 C
v
THE HONOURABLE JAMES JOSHUA EDELMAN JUSTICE OF THE HIGH COURT OF AUSTRALIA & ANOR
[2019] HCASL 130
S331/2018
The plaintiff seeks an order of certiorari to quash the decision of Edelman J of 7 November 2018 that the plaintiff's purported appeal as of right from the judgment and orders of Gageler J of 30 August 2018 was incompetent; an order of mandamus requiring the Full Court to hear and determine the matter according to law; and declarations that the application must be heard and determined by a Full Court constituted by not less than three Justices.
Subsequently, on 11 January 2019, the second defendant filed an application by summons that the plaintiff's application be dismissed as incompetent and that the plaintiff pays the second defendant's costs. Pursuant to r 13.03.1 of the High Court Rules 2004 (Cth), we direct that the summons be determined without listing it for hearing and be granted.
The application is incompetent for the reason that a Justice of this Court is not an officer of the Commonwealth within the meaning of s 75(v) of the Constitution. There is also no reason to doubt the correctness of Gageler J's judgment or orders of 30 August 2018. And there is no basis for the contention that this is a matter which should be heard and determined by a Full Court comprising of not less than three Justices. The application does not disclose an arguable basis for the relief which is sought.
Pursuant to r 25.09.1 of the High Court Rules, the application is dismissed with costs.
G.A.A Nettle M.M Gordon 17 April 2019
0
0
0