Rahardja v Republic of Indonesia

The High Court of Australia considered an application by Mr. Rahardja for leave to appeal against a decision of the Full Federal Court. The dispute concerned the enforceability in Australia of a judgment obtained by the Republic of Indonesia against Mr. Rahardja in Indonesian courts. Mr. Rahardja sought to resist the enforcement of the Indonesian judgment.

The primary legal issue before the High Court was whether the Full Federal Court had erred in upholding the primary judge's decision that the Indonesian judgment was enforceable in Australia. This involved considering whether the Indonesian proceedings had been conducted in a manner that was contrary to Australian public policy, particularly in relation to the right to a fair trial and due process.

The High Court ultimately granted leave to appeal and allowed the appeal. Gleeson CJ and Callinan J found that the Indonesian proceedings had not afforded Mr. Rahardja a fair trial, as he had not been given adequate notice of the proceedings or a proper opportunity to present his defence. Their Honours held that enforcing a judgment obtained in such circumstances would be contrary to fundamental principles of justice and therefore contrary to Australian public policy. The Court concluded that the Full Federal Court had erred in its assessment of the fairness of the Indonesian proceedings.