Reg v Taikato

[1996] HCATrans 250

IN THE HIGH COURT OF AUSTRALIA

Office of the Registry
  Sydney   No S115 of 1995

B e t w e e n -

THE QUEEN

Appellant

and

JO-ANNE TERUIA TAIKATO

Respondent

Directions hearing

GAUDRON J

(In Chambers)

TRANSCRIPT OF PROCEEDINGS

AT CANBERRA ON FRIDAY, 23 AUGUST 1996, AT 9.32 AM

Copyright in the High Court of Australia

(Only part of the proceedings recorded by Auscript)

...Judiciary Act which provides that in the event of a split, the decision, if the decision is from a decision of a Justice of the High Court or a decision of the Supreme Court, that the decision appealed against stands, It would be my respectful submission, in the event that there was to be made a submission, that this is not a decision from a State Supreme Court, it is an appeal, not from a State Supreme Court but an appeal from the Court of Criminal Appeal, in which case the decision of the Chief Justice would prevail.

Now, if we have a two-all split with the Chief Justice on our side, then I suppose I might be being asked to risk a certain - - -

HER HONOUR:   I do not know that you should make any assumption as to the purpose of today’s mention.  I do not think that would be wise to make any assumption, but it is a matter for you.  The fact is no decision has been given.

MR KINTOMINAS:   Your Honour, could I have half a minute?

HER HONOUR:   Yes, certainly.

MR KINTOMINAS:   I am just - - -

HER HONOUR:   You can have longer than half a minute.  It may be a matter on which you would like to get instructions.

MR KINTOMINAS:   Your Honour, I do have a view as to what is to be done and as long as my instructing solicitor does not disagree, I will indicate that view immediately.

HER HONOUR:   Yes.  Well, shall I adjourn or do you just wish to speak ‑ ‑ ‑

MR KINTOMINAS:   If no disrespect if I turn my back to your Honour for a moment.

HER HONOUR:   Yes, certainly, thank you.

MR KINTOMINAS:   Your Honour, I am instructed to agree to the remainder of the Court giving a decision on the matter.

HER HONOUR:   Yes, thank you.  In that event - I am sorry, I think your junior wants you.

MR KINTOMINAS:   Yes, my junior has just pointed out that there was a video, I think, operating when the matter was being heard.  If the remaining three Justices wish to view the video of the argument, I would have no objection.

HER HONOUR:   Was there a video?

MR KINTOMINAS:   There was close circuit television.  Whether or not there is a tape in existence that can be viewed, I do not know.  But if there is, I would have no objection to the Justices viewing that tape.

HER HONOUR:   Thank you.  I suppose the same goes for you, does it, Mr Keleman?

MR KELEMAN:   Yes, subject to whatever view the Court takes under section 19.

HER HONOUR:   That is not a matter on wish to put argument, is it?

MR KELEMAN:   No.

MR KINTOMINAS:   Your Honour, the only thing that then remains is, as a result of this being done, is it envisaged that any supplementary submissions in writing may be required from either side?

HER HONOUR:   I think not.  Thank you, gentlemen.  The transcript will be made available to the other Justices of the Court, together with the other documents in the case.  The Court will now adjourn.

AT 9.37 AM THE MATTER WAS CONCLUDED