Mishra v University of Technology, Sydney S270/2000 [2001] HCATrans 436 (14 September 2001)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF AUSTRALIA

Office of the Registry

Sydney No S270 of 2000 and No S143 of 2001

B e t w e e n -

RAM B. MISHRA

Applicant

and

UNIVERSITY OF TECHNOLOGY, SYDNEY

Respondent

Applications for special leave to appeal

GLEESON CJ

CALLINAN J

TRANSCRIPT OF PROCEEDINGS

AT SYDNEY ON FRIDAY, 14 SEPTEMBER 2001 AT 3.38 PM

Copyright in the High Court of Australia

MR R. MISHRA appeared in person.

MS J. OAKLEY: May it please the Court, I appear for the respondent. (instructed by Minter Ellison)

GLEESON CJ: Yes, Mr Mishra.

MR MISHRA: Today I have come over here to explain the situation. I have come over for an adjournment of this hearing today.

GLEESON CJ: There are two applications for special leave, yes?

MR MISHRA: Yes. Yes, there is two different ones.

GLEESON CJ: Thank you.

MR MISHRA: One more - sorry.

GLEESON CJ: You are applying for an adjournment, is that right?

MR MISHRA: Yes.

GLEESON CJ: Does this document that you have just handed up contain the grounds on which you seek the adjournment?

MR MISHRA: Yes, everything is there.

GLEESON CJ: Just give us an opportunity to read it, please.

MR MISHRA: Yes, your Honour.

GLEESON CJ: Is the application opposed, Ms Oakley?

MS OAKLEY: I will just get some instructions, your Honour. I do not know what the ground is, your Honour, and it is opposed.

GLEESON CJ: We have read that document. The application for adjournment is refused. Go ahead with your application for special leave to appeal.

MR MISHRA: We have already informed them on 21 August about this matter.

GLEESON CJ: Your application for adjournment is refused.

MR MISHRA: Hold on a minute.

GLEESON CJ: You now have two applications for special leave to appeal before the Court. Now is your opportunity to present your argument in support of those applications.

MR MISHRA: Possibly we have not finished that matter of which I am - because the application book which is with you - I have not submitted this application book in the High Court. This High Court itself - they have prepared it without my knowledge and put the applications. That book which has been presented needs some of the part which has been presented which is not - being the applicant, if I am presenting the matter, it should explain the things of what is complained about. And that is not there. That is why I have written very specifically in the last line, number 4. If I would have presented the book myself, then I would have accepted your argument that this is refused today. But I have not submitted - - -

CALLINAN J: There is a limit to what you can include in a book of this kind. You cannot just include in it what you want to include in it. You can only include in it matters that form part of the record in the courts that have dealt with the matter before it comes here. Now, is there anything missing - - -

MR MISHRA: Yes.

CALLINAN J: - - - that is within the record of the matters that were - - -

MR MISHRA: It is missing - - -

CALLINAN J: Well, what documents are missing?

MR MISHRA: Missing is this - supposing if just you ask me to appeal.

CALLINAN J: No. What is missing from the document that should be here?

MR MISHRA: Missing is this. Suppose, if I present the matter, I have to present the things which you understand what is the purpose of appeal. But a purpose of appeal is missing, which explains this - - -

CALLINAN J: You have not told me what is missing. Perhaps I have not heard you properly.

MR MISHRA: If you read the last number 4, it is there. Against the decisions - suppose if I am appealing, you may have a question: why is he appealing? That part is not there. Against all the decisions.

CALLINAN J: You say, the purpose of your appeal is missing.

MR MISHRA: Yes, that is missing.

CALLINAN J: That is not a document that you can put before the Court. Listen to me, I am trying to help you. What you can put before the Court are documents that form part of the record in the courts below and which were admissible in those courts; an outline of submissions; a proposed notice of appeal; and an argument. Now, all of those things are included in the application book.

MR MISHRA: I already said the document, it has been - because I was preparing. It is not that I was - not do. I was preparing the documents and I.....take to them, because then I received the letter from the High Court. If you wish, it was dated 28 August - - -

GLEESON CJ: Do you have there the documents that you say are missing?

MR MISHRA: Yes, I - - -

GLEESON CJ: Why do you not hand them to us, and let us have a look at them, so that we can assess the argument you are making.

MR MISHRA: But it is not organised. I just gave in - - -

GLEESON CJ: You have an opportunity now, if you wish, to present those documents to us, so that we can have a look at them to assess your argument. Do you desire to take advantage of that opportunity?

MR MISHRA: So the things I sent to them - but they are not organised in the way which I sent to them. You can have that one. That explains the reasons why that part is missing. It starts from here.

GLEESON CJ: Thank you.

MR MISHRA: One more to this.

GLEESON CJ: Is there another copy?

MR MISHRA: Okay. That is really the last copy I have.

GLEESON CJ: Just a moment.

CALLINAN J: I will return it to you.

MR MISHRA: That is what I sent to the lady - turned back to me. That is not there at all in that book.

CALLINAN J: Yes, thank you.

GLEESON CJ: Yes. We will keep our copy of that document, hand you back yours. Now - - -

MR MISHRA: Can I have that later?

GLEESON CJ: That?

MR MISHRA: Later, and that pin.

GLEESON CJ: Now, go ahead and present the argument you want to present to us.

MR MISHRA: You mean to say, of all the matter?

GLEESON CJ: Go ahead and present to us any argument you want to present to us in support of your applications for special leave to appeal.

MR MISHRA: Actually, if the matter can be explained by discussions or anything, then no need of giving the application book to you. The application books explain the things in detail. But the things which I can tell you, that is why I need special leave. The matter has gone several processes:....the Court of Appeal, lower court of - Supreme Court. They dismissed the matters without any proof provided from them. Still now, we have not received any document - what are the documents on that basis that my appeal had been dismissed from everywhere. The documents which they have submitted, which is just later.....and they are 25 August 2000, who does not explain there. It is there.

So if they need something from you, stating that I need, against, this argument my documents, against my appeal, to dismiss what are those documents. And, at the same time, there are statements must be provided with the proofs, what they need from you. From my side, whatever I need, I already submitted this to you. They have to provide the proofs and evidence that my appeal, or my applications, is not required to be qualified. For my side, I have already given everything. It is their turn to provide this - could you pass this matter to them? It is their turn to deal with the matter. My turn has been finished.

GLEESON CJ: Yes?

MR MISHRA: Because I cannot support anything - statements cannot provide the documents. If it is - the High Court would have not asked me and send me the applications books. Applications books in there. You might have gone through that. You might have already made up your mind that this is the case and that you want to do it. My coming is there only if you have any doubt, you can ask me, and what way you have not understood the matter. Where you have a doubt, where you have not understood the matter, or some things, if you read the clarification from them, which can support to you that my applications are not going to be approved. Because applications books are such a wide - or something which you are asking me, I can support you in a couple of minutes, ten minutes, five minutes - it is difficult, because for that purpose, we have given the application book.

You might have went through that, and you already made up your mind what you want to do with this case. In the process, if you have any difficulty, you can ask me: what are the reasons? Then, if they have objections against my complaint or my application, what the base on that basis he is decepting or he is insisting you that I have objections on his applications, and that should be dismissed. They have to provide and they have to tell you: this is a fact, and we do not want to process his applications for special leave.

GLEESON CJ: Is there anything else you want to say, or do you just want us to read this - - -

MR MISHRA: It is explained very - - -

GLEESON CJ: Excuse me.

MR MISHRA: Yes?

GLEESON CJ: Is there anything else you want to say, or do you just wish us to read this further material you have handed up?

MR MISHRA: That is whatever I have. It is explained, your Honour. I cannot explain in a couple of minutes.

GLEESON CJ: All right. We will read this material. Would you place that material with the papers, please.

There are before us two applications for special leave to appeal against decisions of the Court of Appeal of the Supreme Court of New South Wales. No reason has been shown to doubt the correctness of either of those decisions and each application is refused with costs.

MR MISHRA: What did you say? I could not understand that.

GLEESON CJ: Thank you. I said the applications are refused with costs. The Court is now adjourned.

AT 3.51 PM THE MATTER WAS CONCLUDED