Re The District Court Registar of the Federal Court of Australia; Ex parte Gamester Pty Ltd

Case

[1993] HCATrans 91

No judgment structure available for this case.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF AUSTRALIA

Registry No C3 of 1993
In the matter of -

An application for a writ of

mandamus against the District

Court Registrar of the

FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

Respondent

Ex parte -

GAMESTER PTY LIMITED

Applicant and Prosecutor

DEANE J

(In Chambers)

TRANSCRIPT OF PROCEEDINGS

Gamester(S) 1 22/4/93

AT CANBERRA ON THURSDAY, 22 APRIL 1993, AT 9.33 AM

Copyright in the High Court of Australia

MR J.W. CONSTANCE:  Your Honour, I appear for the applicant
in this matter. (instructed by Snedden Hall &
Gallop)
HIS HONOUR:  Yes.
MR CONSTANCE:  Your Honour, I regret to inform the Court

that this matter is not ready to proceed, although

I understand that my client, prior to instructing

my firm, did in fact take a number of steps urging

the matter be listed. Your Honour, the situation

is that my firm received instructions on 9 April

and at the time we understood that a number of

affidavits had been filed in this matter. I have

learned, and that was because the Acting Registrar

so informed me, that in fact two of the affidavits

that had been prepared and sworn had in fact only

been lodged with the Registry and had not been

filed.

HIS HONOUR:  Mr Constance, it is an ex parte application,

which means normally there would be no problem in

taking it out of the list and relisting it or

adjourning it. I have glanced at the papers though

and what does concern me is, looking at it, it is

not apparent to me that this is one of those

extraordinarily rare cases in which proceedings by

way of mandamus directed to the Federal Court is an

appropriate method of procedure. Well now, I only

mention that because it would be a great shame if

the applicant's money was wasted on a form of

procedure that is completely inappropriate.

MR CONSTANCE:  Your Honour, I was concerned as to that

matter myself.

HIS HONOUR: Needless to say I am not expressing any final

view on it, but in my years on this Court I cannot

recall any case in which mandamus has been an

appropriate form of procedure for matters internal

to the Federal Court where there has been on the
surface an exercise of jurisdiction there. One can

imagine theoretical circumstances, but they do not

hit you in the face when one reads the

documentation here.

MR CONSTANCE:  Thank you, Your Honour. I was concerned as

to that also, apart from the fact when I learned

yesterday that a large volume of exhibits had not,

in fact, been filed. It was of concern to me as to
the particular procedure adopted. I understand

that the applicant has not had legal representation

for a long time, and that is another reason,

Your Honour, that I would seek an adjournment

because I think there is a deal of work to be done

in further consideration of this matter.

Gamester(8) 2 22/4/93
HIS HONOUR:  There is no problem in that. As I say, I do

not want what I said to be misunderstood, but I am

concerned that an applicant in person being

ultimately landed with a crushing liability for

legal costs because of a misunderstanding of the

nature of proceedings. I have said more than I

intended to say, but what I say is only intended to

be helpful to your client. What would you like me
to do?
MR CONSTANCE:  Would Your Honour be prepared to adjourn the

matter to be relisted on application to the

Registrar?

HIS HONOUR:  I will simply stand the matter out of the list

on the basis that it will be relisted at a future

date. Needless to say, I have read through the

papers in the file. In view of the wide-ranging

allegations, and in some cases innuendoes, I do not

think the matter should be simply allowed to remain

on the file indefinitely.

MR CONSTANCE: Certainly not.

HIS HONOUR:  This means if no steps are taken on behalf of

the applicants, I would imagine the Registry would

take steps to have it relisted.

MR CONSTANCE:  Thank you, Your Honour.
HIS HONOUR:  Thank you, Mr Constance. I will now adjourn.

AT 9.39 AM THE MATTER WAS ADJOURNED SINE DIE

Gamester(8) 3 22/4/93

Areas of Law

  • Civil Procedure

  • Administrative Law

Legal Concepts

  • Judicial Review

  • Jurisdiction

  • Costs

  • Abuse of Process

  • Standing

  • Remedies

Actions
Download as PDF Download as Word Document


Cases Citing This Decision

0

Cases Cited

0

Statutory Material Cited

0