Skyring, An application by - [1994] HCATrans 390

•

.

•

•

IN THE HIGH COURT OF AUSTRALIA

Office of the Registry

Brisbane No Cl00 of 1994
In the matter of -
An Application by
ALAN GEORGE SKYRING, B.E.
M.I.E.Aust

DAWSON J

(In Chambers)

TRANSCRIPT OF PROCEEDINGS

AT BRISBANE ON WEDNESDAY, 29 JUNE 1994, AT 9.00 AM

Skyring(l6)

29/6/94

HIS HONOUR:

Mr Sk:yring, you appear in person, do you?

MR A.G. SKYRING: Yes, Your Honour.

HIS HONOUR: Yes, Mr Sk:yring, and your application is for

leave to proceed with the proceedings which are
outlined in not this summons, but the summons which
you want to issue - - -

MR SKYRING:

The one of 11 May, yes, as I understand

proceedings.

HIS HONOUR:

Yes, Mr Sk:yring.

I should say that time is

limited this morning

MR SKYRING:	I will be very quick, Your Honour.
HIS HONOUR:	So, what I propose to do is to give you

20 minutes which is the time that is normally given
to applications for special leave to appeal, and I
will give you a warning at 17 minutes.

MR SKYRING:

That is far better than I have had on the last

couple of occasions, it has been five minutes, so I
am really sharpened up.

HIS HONOUR: Well, time is ticking for you now, Mr Skyring.

MR SKYRING:

To formally commence proceedings then I read my

notice of motion of 18 May and the affidavit of
that date, and the supplementary affidavits of
3 June and of 24 June.

HIS HONOUR:

I have read the affidavits.

MR SKYRING: Right, and if I may, Your Honour, I would also

like to hand up one now with today's date, which is
a very brief one, which brings the information
right up to date.

HIS HONOUR:	All right, well if you will hand that up.
MR SKYRING:	In the first part, the first item refers to the

delay in my getting the documentation on this
particular hearing.

HIS HONOUR: Well now, if you would just give me a minute to

read it.

MR SKYRING: Yes, Your Honour.

HIS HONOUR:	Yes, Mr Sk:yring.
MR SKYRING:	Okay, it is that last matter which affects me

very personally, the fact that I can be charged
with an offence under section 16 of the Crimes

Sk:yring(l6)

29/6/94

Currency Act. The basis of the argument put is whether, in fact, these items are in fact lawfully current - - -

HIS HONOUR:

But what you seek to do in the present

application is to obtain leave - - -

MR SKYRING: Right, the point I wish to address is that

there is a - - -

HIS HONOUR:

Can I just get clear what this application is.

It is for leave to apply for a writ of certiorari
to quash several decisions, and the decisions are -
now listen carefully - first of all that the
judgment of Justice Spender in the Federal
Court - - -

MR SKYRING: This court here,…

Grounds of appeal

[14] The appellant contends that the primary judge erred in finding that the respondent had discharged the onus of establishing the matters required under the relevant provision.

[15] It was submitted that his Honour failed to give adequate weight to the evidence of the second witness, and that the findings of fact were not reasonably open on the material before the Court.

[16] The respondent, for its part, submits that no error is disclosed, and that the conclusions reached were well within the range of outcomes available to the primary judge.

Consideration

[17] It is convenient to deal first with the question of construction, as the resolution of that issue informs the remaining grounds advanced by the appellant.

[18] For the reasons that follow, we are of the view that the appeal should be allowed in part and the matter remitted for further determination.

Continue reading Skyring, An application by

Details

AGLC: Skyring, An application by [1994] HCATrans 390
Case: [1994] HCATrans 390
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

This matter came before the High Court of Australia on an application by Mr Alan George Skyring, appearing in person, for leave to proceed with proceedings. Mr Skyring sought to quash several decisions, including a judgment of Justice Spender in the Federal Court, an order made by Justice Dowsett in the Supreme Court of Queensland on 17 December 1990, and a decision of the Queensland Court of Appeal in *Skyring v The Commissioner of Taxation*. Beyond these specific decisions, Mr Skyring also sought to challenge the validity of certain provisions of the *Telecommunications Act 1975*, the *Currency Act 1965*, the *Income Tax Assessment Act*, and the *Commonwealth Electoral Act*.

The central legal issues before the court concerned Mr Skyring's application for leave to pursue judicial review of these decisions and legislative provisions. Specifically, the court was required to determine whether Mr Skyring had established sufficient grounds to be granted leave to apply for a writ of certiorari. This involved considering the nature of the decisions he sought to challenge and the broader validity of the statutes underpinning them, particularly in relation to issues of payment, legal tender, and penalties.

The court's reasoning, as indicated by the transcript, focused on clarifying the scope of Mr Skyring's application. His Honour noted that the application was for leave to apply for a writ of certiorari to quash the identified judgments and orders. Mr Skyring elaborated that his challenge extended to the legality of the statutes themselves, citing concerns about payment provisions, the definition of legal tender, and the validity of taxation and electoral legislation. The court acknowledged the various affidavits filed by Mr Skyring, which provided the factual basis for his application.

Orders