State of Queensland v Wrightson

[2005] HCATrans 921

[2005] HCATrans 921

IN THE HIGH COURT OF AUSTRALIA

Office of the Registry
  Brisbane  No B91 of 2005

B e t w e e n -

STATE OF QUEENSLAND

Applicant

and

TIMOTHY JAMES WRIGHTSON

Respondent

Summons for expedition

GUMMOW J

TRANSCRIPT OF PROCEEDINGS

FROM BRISBANE BY VIDEO LINK TO CANBERRA

ON MONDAY, 14 NOVEMBER 2005, AT 1.29 PM

Copyright in the High Court of Australia

MR D.O.J. NORTH, SC:   May it please the Court, I appear with my learned friend, MR J.B. ROLLS, for the applicant.  (instructed by the Crown Solicitor for the State of Queensland)

MR D.B. FRASER, QC:   May it please the Court, I appear for the respondent.  (instructed by Gilshenan & Luton)

HIS HONOUR:   Yes.  What is the respondent’s attitude to the summons?

MR FRASER:   It is not opposed, your Honour.  There is obviously some merit in the course which is proposed.

HIS HONOUR:   Yes.  Are you appearing in any of the matters already set down for that day?

MR FRASER:   The other appeals involving extension of time that involve the plaintiffs known as Stephenson and Reeman, I am appearing in those matters, as is Mr North, I understand, your Honour.

HIS HONOUR:   Yes.  Has not Mr Douglas some involvement?

MR FRASER:   Mr Douglas is appearing in the other matter which was set down to be heard on the same day and there is some reference in the material to communications with him and the estimates of time that may be involved in dealing with all the matters on the one day.

HIS HONOUR:   Yes.  How many sets of counsel are there, three?

MR FRASER:   Mr North may be able to assist.

HIS HONOUR:   Yes.

MR NORTH:   In the matters of Wrightson, Reeman and Stephenson I will be appearing for the State of Queensland in all three.  Assuming today’s application is successful I will have different juniors but I will be presenting the argument.  Mr Fraser will be appearing for the individual plaintiffs or – respondents or applicants or appellants, as the case may be opposed.

In the other matters called Davison which were granted leave to be heard later in the day and are set down for the 14^th, Mr Douglas will be appearing for Davison and the individuals and Mr Grant‑Taylor of Senior Counsel will be appearing for the State of Queensland.  I have spoken to both of them.  They think that their appeal in argument will be much shorter than the Reeman, Stephenson, Wrightson issues.  Mr Fraser and I have spoken about a provisional allocation of time and even if we require, say,

15 minutes in the afternoon for a reply Mr Douglas and Mr Grant‑Taylor both consider they would still have sufficient time to present any oral argument that afternoon in those later matters.

HIS HONOUR:   Yes, and in the matters in which you were involved there is a process already in train following a letter from the Registrar as to who is to assume the role of appellant and who is to assume the role of respondent in terms of getting written submissions in.

MR NORTH:   That is so, your Honour.

HIS HONOUR:   You would wish to extend this to that?

MR NORTH:   That is so.  That is what we propose.

HIS HONOUR:   Yes, thank you.  You move on the summons filed on 25 October and there is an affidavit in support by Mr Cuylenburg sworn of the same day?

MR NORTH:   That is so, your Honour, and to the extent that it is relevant also the materials already filed on the application for special leave to appeal.

HIS HONOUR:   Yes, thank you.  The other thing I wanted to ask you, Mr North, was Justice Williams a party to either of the other two appeals in which you were appearing?

MR NORTH:   Yes, he is the common thread in the sense that he has sat and delivered judgments in all three matters.  Then division surrounds whether the approach of Justice Davies should prevail even against the approach of Justice Williams or whether there is a third position which will be contended for by the State reflecting judgments of Justice Chesterman and other justices of the Supreme Court.

HIS HONOUR:   Yes.  The other two judges in the Wrightson matter, have they ‑ ‑ ‑

MR NORTH:   The President and Justice Jerrard.

HIS HONOUR:   Yes.  I think the President has been in the other matters, has she not?

MR NORTH:   Her namesake at first instance was the trial judge in Stephenson.

HIS HONOUR:   Yes, thank you.

I am minded to accede to the relief sought in the summons.  I make order 1 in the terms of the summons and order 3.  Order 2 sought such orders or directions as are necessary for the preparation of an application or appeal book in compliance with practice direction 1 of 2002 or 2001.  In that regard it will be sufficient to order that the matter proceed in accordance with paragraph 9 of your outline of submissions today, I think, Mr North.  Would that deal with it?

MR NORTH:   That would be sufficient, your Honour, as we see it.

HIS HONOUR:   Yes.  Do you agree with that, Mr Fraser, as to the modus operandi?

MR FRASER:   Yes, your Honour.  That has been the subject of previous discussion between Mr North and myself.

HIS HONOUR:   Yes, I gathered that.

MR FRASER:   The only matter I would perhaps just like to raise is that it may be convenient if we have some leeway in terms of the length of the written submissions under the practice direction because it may be that we need perhaps 25 pages rather than the 20 and rather than boldly putting it in without a direction of the Court I thought it preferable to raise that with your Honour now.

HIS HONOUR:   Yes.  There is going to be some consolidation, is there not that would produce greater length?

MR FRASER:   Yes, your Honour, all three matters will be addressed in the one outline.

HIS HONOUR:   Yes, that is very helpful.  You have any leave necessary to implement that program.

MR FRASER:   Thank you, your Honour.

HIS HONOUR:   Is there anything else, gentlemen?

MR NORTH:   No, your Honour.

HIS HONOUR:   Very well.  You will convey the substance of what has happened today to counsel in the remaining matters?

MR NORTH:   Yes, your Honour.

HIS HONOUR:   Thank you.  We will now adjourn.

AT 1.36 PM THE MATTER WAS CONCLUDED