Vadarlis v MIMA

[2001] HCATrans 481

IN THE HIGH COURT OF AUSTRALIA

Office of the Registry
  Melbourne  No M93 of 2001

B e t w e e n -

ERIC VADARLIS

Applicant

and

THE HONOURABLE PHILIP RUDDOCK MP, MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION AND MULTICULTURAL AFFAIRS

First Respondent

THE COMMONWEALTH OF AUSTRALIA

Second Respondent

WILLIAM JOHN FARMER

Third Respondent

HUMAN RIGHTS AND EQUAL OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION

Fourth Respondent

AMNESTY INTERNATIONAL LTD

Fifth Respondent

Application for special leave to appeal

GAUDRON J
GUMMOW J
HAYNE J

TRANSCRIPT OF PROCEEDINGS

AT SYDNEY ON TUESDAY, 27 NOVEMBER 2001, AT 1.58 PM

Copyright in the High Court of Australia

__________________

MR G. GRIFFITH, QC:   If the Court pleases, I appear with my learned friends, MR J.I. FAJGENBAUM, QC and MR C.J. HORAN, for the applicant.  (instructed by Riordan & Partners)

MR D.M.J. BENNETT, QC, Solicitor‑General for the Commonwealth:   If the Court pleases, I appear with my learned friends MR R.R.S. TRACEY, QC, MR P.J. BASTON, MR G.A. HILL, and MR D.I. STAR for the first, second and third respondents.  (instructed by the Australian Government Solicitor)

MR J. BASTEN, QC:   If the Court pleases, I appear with MS K.L. EASTMAN, for the fourth respondent.  (instructed by the Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Commission)

GAUDRON J:   I should inform the parties that the Deputy Registrar has certified that she has been informed by Slater & Gordon, solicitors for Amnesty International, the fifth respondent in this matter, that Amnesty International Ltd does not propose to take any part in these proceedings. 

I think the Deputy Registrar has already indicated that you will not be held strictly to the 20 minutes that would normally apply, but you may find the light after 30 minutes if you have not completed your argument within that time.  That does not extend to you, Mr Basten.  It seems that your interest in this is somewhat peripheral and you should confine yourself to the 20 minutes.

MR GRIFFITH:   If your Honour pleases, I hope to be gone before first light.  Your Honour, there is an affidavit that was served on us at 3.30 pm on Friday from Lysbeth Mary Haigh.  We wish to object to that affidavit being put in evidence at this stage.  There is an earlier affidavit ‑ ‑ ‑

GAUDRON J:   Let me understand the basis of you objecting.  Is it an objection to some parts of it, or to the reception of an affidavit at all?

MR GRIFFITH:   Particularly to paragraph 9, we object.  As we understand it there is an affidavit that it included ‑ ‑ ‑

GUMMOW J:   Is it in the book?

MR GRIFFITH:   No, your Honour, it was separate.  In the book at page 189 to 191 is the principal affidavit to which this is simply supplemental.  That affidavit was filed in connection with an application for expedition, heard by his Honour Justice Hayne.  We understood it as being confined to that purpose, but we have no objection to that affidavit being read in this proceeding.…