Van Londen v Dobson

[2009] HCATrans 67

[2009] HCATrans 067

IN THE HIGH COURT OF AUSTRALIA

Office of the Registry
  Sydney  No S306 of 2005

B e t w e e n -

SOFIE VAN LONDEN

Applicant

and

ROGER WILLIAM DOBSON

Respondent

Application for special leave to appeal

BELL J

TRANSCRIPT OF PROCEEDINGS

AT SYDNEY ON TUESDAY, 15 APRIL 2009, AT 9.54 AM

Copyright in the High Court of Australia

MS S.L. JENKINS:   May it please the Court, I appear for the applicant.  (instructed by the applicant)

MS E. BEDFORD:   May it please the Court, I appear for the respondent.  (instructed by Slade Manwaring)

HER HONOUR:   Ms Jenkins.

MS JENKINS:   This morning’s application, your Honour, is an application brought by the firm Broun Abrahams Burreket, the former legal representatives for the applicant.  It was filed on 24 December 2008 and seeks an order that we be removed as the solicitors on the record for Ms Van Londen.

HER HONOUR:   Is there any objection to that order?

MS BEDFORD:   There is no objection.

HER HONOUR:   I just will have handed down to you, Ms Jenkins, and a copy for Ms Bedford, a document that it would appear the applicant, Sofie Van Londen, attempted to file by facsimile in the Registry of the Court.  There is not provision for acceptance of the document in that form, but I was unaware, Ms Jenkins, whether that matter had come to your attention or not.

MS JENKINS:   Your Honour, I did receive a copy by email this morning.  I understand that you cannot accept that for filing today.

HER HONOUR:   Yes, very well.  Ms Jenkins, you move on your affidavit which was sworn on 9 April 2009 and on the affidavit filed on 24 December 2008 being the affidavit of Wendy Sue Broun, is that so?

MS JENKINS:   That is correct, your Honour.

HER HONOUR: I note there is no objection to the making of the order. In the circumstances, it is appropriate that you be granted the leave that is sought, Ms Jenkins. Leave is granted pursuant to rule 6.02.5(c) of the High Court Rules 2004 for Broun Abrahams Burreket to withdraw as the solicitors for the applicant. Is it necessary to make any further order?

MS JENKINS:   I am happy with that order, your Honour.

MS BEDFORD:   We then would have the obligation to serve our documents on Ms Van Londen now, so other than that, no.  In terms of costs, I would seek our costs be reserved, if there is a further occasion, for having to turn up today.

HER HONOUR:   What do you say to that, Ms Jenkins?

MS BEDFORD:   Sorry, not in relation to her, but in relation to Ms Van Londen.  My understanding is Broun Abrahams Burreket have gone off the record January 2008.  We filed June 2008.  We had to file and serve on Broun Abrahams Burreket.  They were not able to go off the record because of the wife’s non‑co‑operation. 

HER HONOUR:   So the form of the order that you seek is an order reserving your costs in relation to your attendance today?

MS BEDFORD:   Yes.

HER HONOUR:   I take it, Ms Jenkins, you do not want to be heard on that?  Very well.  I will reserve the respondent’s costs of the attendance today.  Is it necessary to make any further order in relation to your summons, Ms Jenkins?

MS JENKINS:   No, your Honour.

HER HONOUR:   The only relief that you claimed.  Yes, very well.  The Court will adjourn.

AT 9.59 AM THE MATTER WAS CONCLUDED