Sinanovic v The Queen

[2001] HCATrans 47

IN THE HIGH COURT OF AUSTRALIA

Office of the Registry
  Sydney  No S7 of 2001

B e t w e e n -

HAKIJA SINANOVIC

Applicant

and

THE QUEEN

Respondent

Summons for expedition

GAUDRON J

(In Chambers)

TRANSCRIPT OF PROCEEDINGS

AT SYDNEY ON THURSDAY, 22 FEBRUARY 2001 AT 9.57 AM

Copyright in the High Court of Australia

MRS M.A. SINANOVIC:   Your Honour, I am seeking leave to appear for the applicant, Hakija Sinanovic.

HER HONOUR:   Yes, that is not opposed?

MR A.M. BLACKMORE:   That is not opposed, your Honour.  I appear for the respondent.  (instructed by the Solicitor for Public Prosecutions (New South Wales))

HER HONOUR:   Yes, thank you.  Do I understand, Mrs Sinanovic, that a trial date has been fixed for your husband's further trial?

MRS SINANOVIC:   That is correct, your Honour.

HER HONOUR:   What date is that?

MRS SINANOVIC:   14 May this year.

HER HONOUR:   And was the Court informed that there was a special leave application pending?

MRS SINANOVIC:   Your Honour, if I may say this:  I was not present in court that day.  Mr Sinanovic endeavoured, but was unsuccessful, as far as I believe.  I have endeavoured to obtain the transcript to have it available for this Court today, only to be told that the Chief Judge will not release it, but the DPP was informed and we believe that the Crown would inform that court if Mr Sinanovic did not have an opportunity to do so, but I was told by Mr Sinanovic that in the presence of the court that day the Crown did not speak at all.

HER HONOUR:   Very well.  Mrs Sinanovic, I wish to raise some matters with the respondent.

MRS SINANOVIC:   Yes.

HER HONOUR:   You have heard what was said in the last case?

MRS SINANOVIC:   I did.

HER HONOUR:   And it would not seem fair to grant the Crown application and to refuse the application of an individual litigant, but I should tell you the only date I can give you is 10 April.

MRS SINANOVIC:   Prior to May as the special leave hearing?

HER HONOUR:   Well, yes.

MRS SINANOVIC:   Well, your Honour, if that is the date that you can give me, then I will endeavour to do my very best.  I shall ensure that that hearing can be set down.  I did, your Honour, have an affidavit that I would wish to file in support of this summons.

HER HONOUR:   I do not think you - you are ahead at the moment, Mrs Sinanovic.

MRS SINANOVIC:   It is just - it is the affidavit of actually what had happened in the trial on - sorry, I withdraw that - what happened on 16 February and what led up to it to make the High Court aware of the difficulty and impediment that we are experiencing down in the Sydney District Court.  If I may be permitted to file this affidavit to have it on the record.

HER HONOUR:   Yes.  It is not necessarily a matter that we can do anything about, but is the affidavit objected to, Mr Blackmore?

MR BLACKMORE:   No, I do not object.

HER HONOUR:   Yes, very well.  It can be filed in Court.

MRS SINANOVIC:   Thank you, your Honour.

HER HONOUR:   Yes.  At this stage though I do not think it is necessary for me to read it at this stage, but I will speak to - I have some questions of Mr Blackmore.  Now, Mr Blackmore, you heard what I said in the earlier case?

MR BLACKMORE:   I did, yes.

HER HONOUR:   Now, what ‑ ‑ ‑

MR BLACKMORE:   Our position was we were in the hands of the court as to whether or not it ‑ ‑ ‑

HER HONOUR:   No, no, you were not in the hands of the court.  Did you inform the court that there was a special leave application?

MR BLACKMORE:   I do not have the answer to that question, I am sorry.  I have asked my instructing solicitor.  He did not ‑ ‑ ‑

HER HONOUR:   Now, I shall - not only I, but a somewhat more stringent attitude may be taken if what is emerging today becomes a regular practice where trial dates are fixed by courts that are either informed of the existence of special leave applications and treat that matter as of no consequence or by courts who are not informed of the existence of special leave applications, presumably - well, by the prosecution.  I regard it as the duty of the prosecutors to make that information available to the courts and the time of this Court is not to be taken up in consequence of either the failure to disclose the existence of special leave applications or courts disregarding that.  There are other remedies besides the grant of expedition.  There is, for example, the possibility of staying the prosecution pending the hearing of the special leave applications and I would expect the prosecution services of this country to know that and to ensure that there is not a repeat of these two cases.

MR BLACKMORE:   I will have those words taken down and conveyed, your Honour.

HER HONOUR:   Very well.  Now, I presume it is as much to your advantage to have the special leave application expedited as it is to Mr Sinanovic?

MR BLACKMORE:   Of course.  It is of no prejudice at all to us to have it ‑ ‑ ‑

HER HONOUR:   Very well.  Now, Mrs Sinanovic, this will require you to file your argument in support and your draft grounds of appeal by 28 February - no, I am sorry, by 7 March and that gives you a fortnight, which I think should be ample time.

MRS SINANOVIC:   May I say, your Honour, that I do actually have the written submissions in support of the argument with me today and that can be filed now at the Registry.

HER HONOUR:   Well, that is a matter for you, but you, in fact, have until 7 March, if you need to do it.

MRS SINANOVIC:   Thank you.

HER HONOUR:   Mr Blackmore, you would not need more than seven days to do your response?

MR BLACKMORE:   In this matter, no, your Honour.

HER HONOUR:   No.  You have until 14 March.  Are there any problems about service on Mrs Sinanovic?  What has been done in the past, Mr Blackmore?

MR BLACKMORE:   I do not believe that has been a problem with Mrs Sinanovic.

MRS SINANOVIC:   It has just been sent to my post office box address.

MR BLACKMORE:   There is also a fax number which she has provided to us which we could use, if that is appropriate for her.

HER HONOUR:   Yes.  What I am about to suggest is that, whether by fax or otherwise, your reply should reach Mrs Sinanovic by 14 March.  Mrs Sinanovic, you then have a further seven days, until 21 March, to file your reply and, as happened in the last matter, although the DPP was there the applicant, I think it is in your interests, Mr Blackmore, for the DPP to assume responsibility for the application book and to have that available by 28 March.

Now, that having been said, I think all that is necessary for me is to make a formal order expediting the hearing of the special leave application and listing it for hearing in Sydney at 2.00 pm on 10 April 2001.

I take it I do not need to make formal orders with respect to the dates?

MR BLACKMORE:   No, your Honour.

HER HONOUR:   No.

MRS SINANOVIC:   Thank you, your Honour.

HER HONOUR:   Very well, thank you.

AT 10.06 AM THE MATTER WAS CONCLUDED