South Sydney City Council v Minister for Local Government & Anor S307/2002 [2002] HCATrans 501 (14 October 2002)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF AUSTRALIA

Office of the Registry

Sydney No S307 of 2002

B e t w e e n -

SOUTH SYDNEY CITY COUNCIL

Applicant

and

MINISTER FOR LOCAL GOVERNMENT

First Respondent

LOCAL GOVERNMENT BOUNDARIES COMMISSION

Second Respondent

Summons for expedition

GAUDRON J

(In Chambers)

TRANSCRIPT OF PROCEEDINGS

AT SYDNEY ON MONDAY, 14 OCTOBER 2002, AT 10.21 AM

Copyright in the High Court of Australia

MR D.F. JACKSON, QC: If your Honour please, I appear with my learned friend, MR M.B.J. LEE, for the applicant. (instructed by Marsdens Law Group)

MR N. PERRAM: I appear for the respondents, your Honour. (instructed by I.V. Knight, Crown Solicitor for the State of New South Wales)

MR JACKSON: Your Honour should have our submissions in support of the application for expedition which set out the material upon which we rely. Could I add two things to it, your Honour. One is that paragraph 4 said that there had not yet been a summary of argument from the respondent. That has now occurred.

HER HONOUR: Let us assume special leave were granted. The matter would not be determined, would it, in the timeframe that you say is so critical?

MR JACKSON: Your Honour, all I can say is it depends.

HER HONOUR: I do not understand that.

MR JACKSON: Your Honour, what I mean by that is if the matter were granted special leave in the relatively near future and the appeal were heard with expedition granted to it, then our submission would be that it would be possible for the matter to be decided as soon as one could.

HER HONOUR: Well, the first date on which you could even contemplate by way of expedition of the special leave application is February.

MR JACKSON: Yes, your Honour. Your Honour, that has the result, of course, that the matter, if special leave be granted, is put on further at a later date. There is really in a sense nothing we can do about that. We regard the case as one, with respect, that should be dealt with as soon as possible. If in the event it cannot be dealt with and resolved until the ensuing financial year, unfortunately we will have to accommodate ourselves to that and so will the other side. But we do submit it is an appropriate case for expedition and, your Honour, I do not know that I can advance it beyond saying that.

When I say I cannot advance it beyond saying that, I am conscious of the fact that we have given an undertaking to seek expedition. We do so, your Honour, and I do not wish to be thought to be in any way suggesting we should not have it.

HER HONOUR: Is there any real purpose to be served by expedition, Mr Perram?

MR PERRAM: Beyond that which we set out in our written submissions, no, except perhaps this issue, which is that undoubtedly if special leave were granted, administrative complexities are going to get worse and it might be thought in those circumstances that there was little point in expediting it. Of course another logical possibility of the application for special leave is that it is dismissed and with the injunction currently restraining my client is dissolved. That possibility, of course, would provide a proper reason for expediting it now.

It should not necessarily be assumed that special leave would be granted and we should be entitled at least to have that possibility of defeat of the applicant taken into account in the question of how much administrative chaos is to be caused within the inner city.

HER HONOUR: I understand.

MR PERRAM: There is nothing further I can say.

HER HONOUR: It does seem a matter of considerable importance to a very large section of the community at least. Accordingly, the matter will be expedited for hearing in Sydney on 14 February. Costs of the application to be costs of the special leave application. Certify for the attendance of counsel. Thank you.

AT 10.25 AM THE MATTER WAS CONCLUDED