The Northern Territory of Australia v Sangare

[2018] HCATrans 269

[2018] HCATrans 269

IN THE HIGH COURT OF AUSTRALIA

Office of the Registry
  Darwin  No D10 of 2018

B e t w e e n -

THE NORTHERN TERRITORY OF AUSTRALIA

Applicant

and

SOULEYMANE SANGARE

Respondent

GAGELER J

TRANSCRIPT OF PROCEEDINGS

FROM SYDNEY BY VIDEO LINK TO DARWIN

ON FRIDAY, 21 DECEMBER 2018, AT 10.25 AM

Copyright in the High Court of Australia

MS S.L. BROWNHILL, SC, Solicitor‑General for the Northern Territory:   May it please the Court, I appear with my friend, MR L.S. PEATTIE, for the applicant.  (instructed by Solicitor for the Northern Territory)

HIS HONOUR:   Thank you, Ms Brownhill.  I note that there is no appearance for the respondent.  I note also that the respondent has not filed an appearance at all in the Court and has indicated to the Registrar that he proposes to take no part in the appeal.  Yes, Ms Brownhill.

MS BROWNHILL:   Thank you, your Honour.  In light of that, your Honour, I understand, may have some correspondence that we provided to the Registrar in relation to the possibility of appointing counsel from the Northern Territory as amicus curiae to act essentially as a contradictor in the matter.

HIS HONOUR:   Yes, thank you.  The Registrar has received from the Solicitor for the Northern Territory a list of counsel who, I take it, have indicated their willingness to act as amicus curiae in the matter?

MS BROWNHILL:   Yes, that is right, your Honour.

HIS HONOUR:   Now, the difficulty for me is that I have five names.  Surely, two would be enough.

MS BROWNHILL:   Yes, I agree, your Honour.  Two would be plenty.  Perhaps the way to proceed would be, given that Mr Crawley is the only senior counsel who has offered, that he could be appointed with whichever of those juniors he thinks is the appropriate one.

HIS HONOUR:   Yes, very well. I am happy to proceed that way and I am also prepared to make that appointment now. If I make that appointment I think that no other orders would be necessary other than to modify the application of Part 44 of the High Court Rules so as to place the amicus in the position of the respondent for the filing of submissions.

MS BROWNHILL:   Yes, that would be our view also, your Honour.  If the appointment is made it is probably unnecessary to make an order that compliance with rule 42.08A be waived.  That is the rule that deals with making an application to be heard as amicus by way of written submissions.

HIS HONOUR:   Yes.  So if I were to say that Miles Crawley SC and a junior counsel of his choice be appointed as amicus curiae in the appeal?

MS BROWNHILL:   Yes.

HIS HONOUR:   Then I will make a consequential order modifying the application of Part 44 of the High Court Rules. Is there anything else I need to deal with?

MS BROWNHILL:   Not as far as we can proceed it, thank you, your Honour.

HIS HONOUR:   Right, thank you.  The three orders that I make are as follows:

1.Miles Crawley SC and a junior counsel of his choice be appointed amicus curiae in the appeal.

2.For the purpose of Part 44 of the High Court Rules 2004 (Cth), the amicus curiae are to be treated as the respondent to the appeal.

3.The costs of this directions hearing are costs in the appeal.

MS BROWNHILL:   Yes, thank you.

HIS HONOUR:   Thank you very much.  The Court will now adjourn.

AT 10.30 AM THE MATTER WAS ADJOURNED