Luck, an appeal by M11/2001 [2002] HCATrans 624 (11 December 2002)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF AUSTRALIA

Office of the Registry

Melbourne No M11 of 2001

In the matter of -

An appeal by GAYE ALEXANDRA MARY LUCK

Summons for Directions

GAUDRON J

(In Chambers)

TRANSCRIPT OF PROCEEDINGS

AT CANBERRA ON WEDNESDAY, 11 DECEMBER 2002, AT 9.33 AM

Copyright in the High Court of Australia

MS G.A.M. LUCK appeared in person.

I would like to correct that my name is Gaye Alexandra Mary Luck in the title of the proceedings, thank you.

HER HONOUR: Yes, thank you. I will amend the list accordingly. Now, it is your application. As I understand it, there are three orders that you seek.

MS LUCK: Your Honour, firstly, I am sorry if I cannot sit - I have to stand or sit as I need because I have a problem with my back and I am in quite a bit of pain at the moment.

HER HONOUR: Very well. You do as you find appropriate or comfortable.

MS LUCK: Thank you very much. Your Honour, I have just arrived this morning and I had a problem with filing my documents again. I have had to do a lot of my work by hand because I have come here to this Court as opposed to Melbourne Court and I have not got the means to type or do anything else. So I am sorry if my affidavits are in writing and I hope that you can understand them.

Firstly, the affidavit that I filed - well, I handed it in at the Registry this morning, of M11 of 2001, which is this matter of the appeal. That affidavit outlines basically what I - I did not have time to write a written submission so I put in basically the affidavit all the issues and matters that I wish to mention in this hearing. I am afraid you did not have time probably to read it all or whatever, but it basically relates to matters that are connected with this appeal in M134, which is the original process that I attempted to issue out of the High Court in Melbourne and it was refused by his Honour the Chief Justice.

That was brought in under the Human Rights Australian Treaties and the Human Rights Equal Opportunity Commission Act 1914 and the Crimes (Torture) Act . Since I have been refused that issuing of that writ, my circumstances have progressively got worse and worse and the reasons that I was bringing those individuals and corporations into that particular writ was because of the torture being intentionally inflicted upon me in the processing of all my court documents and in the processing of any of my matters. After that writ was refused, my matters got more and more convoluted and I could not attend hearings and appear at any of the hearings because of my illness and the distress and pain and suffering that I was experiencing because of the refusal to provide my rights as a disabled person under the Disability Discrimination Act 2002 , which incorporates the declaration of the rights of disabled persons, and that is a treaty as well.

Now, because of all the circumstances, the matters in my life continue to get worse and worse. I was - because of the circumstances in Melbourne where I live, I am under financial difficulties as well in my general life because of my disabilities and I am on a pension. I am a lessee in a rented premises and at the time during which these matters were - when I issued the writ or attempted to issue the writ, I was trying to seek the High Court to prohibit the conduct that was causing me all these problems and I have not yet had a hearing on any of my notices of motion that I have tried to bring to this Court and today I am afraid that basically all the issues that I brought up in any of the notices of motion that I filed in the Court previously since March or January 2001, I hope to at least have them considered, some of the issues that relate - - -

HER HONOUR: The only matter that is before the Court, Ms Luck, is your application which was filed on 5 November 2002 in matter M11 of 2001 which is for directions in relation to an appeal filed against the Chief Justice's refusal to issue the writ and in that you also seek an order with respect to time and you seek to join other parties to that writ. Now, that is all that is before me for orders today.

MS LUCK: Yes, your Honour, but I did - I am disabled and I have great difficulty. I also filed a certificate of identifying exhibit with that on 5 November with that summons for the chamber hearing and that was related to a Queensland court matter, the District Court of Queensland matter, which is a personal injury matter. I am afraid that there is not - I mean, I appreciate that this hearing is for M11 of 2001 but it cannot be extracted on its own from all the other issues that - - -

HER HONOUR: But I cannot determine that matter on its merits, do you understand? That does not have - - -

MS LUCK: The appeal matter?

HER HONOUR: Yes.

MS LUCK: Absolutely. I understand that I have to make submissions for this, but I have written to you, your Honour, and to the Court seeking to inform you of my circumstances, which I am sure, if you have received any of the letters which I have asked the Registrar to forward on to you, you will have some understanding of the matter. To be quite honest, I have not been able to progress anything to do with these matters in the Court since 23 March 2001 when I was actually forcibly evicted from my premises on 20 March 2001 and my circumstances got worse and worse and I was persecuted and discriminated and abused and have not been able to avoid this persecution of me when dealing with anything to do with the matters that I brought to the court - the matters in the Federal Court - which I originally filed in June and July of 2000, and they were matters V392, 393, 394 and 541 of 2000, and they were matters relating to the injury of me through poisoning by fibreglass in a rented premises that I lived in in northern Queensland, in Townsville.

At that time I attempted to have the local council, the Environment Department, the real estate agents, the landlord and a number of other parties to do something to eradicate the problem. I was denied basically everything, including from the Rental Tribunal. In fact, I really do not want to go into the details of these issues because they distress me so much, and I really would like you to understand, if you would not mind, and indulge me a little bit, in that, as I said, these matters are so distressing that it is not good for me to talk about them, and I have at this stage not - I actually wrote to the Registrar of the High Court on 23 March 2001 and I wrote a handwritten letter stating my circumstances of homelessness and of my dire circumstances in relation to my health and that I had been advised not to - to have a rest and recuperate and to have treatment for several months before doing anything else in regard to these matters.

Now, I wrote letters to all the respondents in all my matters, to the Registrar of the High Court, to the registrar of the Federal Court, and I have now discovered through inspecting the documents in this Registry here that have been sent up from Melbourne that the M96 to 99, which are special leave to appeal applications from Justice Weinberg in the Federal Court of 8 August 2000, where he transferred all my matters to the Queensland branch of the Federal Court or Federal Court registry, in that he made some jurisdictional errors and, with all due respect to his Honour, he made jurisdictional errors and deprived me of my rights. I have not been able to progress any of those matters because I have been unable to do any of the work, open letters, read letters, write letters, in regard to any of those matters. It was clearly stated and I provided information and adequate notification of that issue to all the people involved, including the courts.

Because my matters were transferred to Queensland, being in my circumstances, I was unable to appear in Queensland because of financial difficulties to even get there. I was also denied the right to have my hearing separately on four different matters - - -

HER HONOUR: But what does that have to do with this appeal?

MS LUCK: Well, this appeal brings all the persons involved in the denial of all these rights that I have in the courts and in the progression of my matters, and there are tribunals involved now as well. I had no choice. The High Court has original jurisdiction over matters involving treaties, under section 75(i), and that matter - - -

HER HONOUR: But I am only here today to deal with three aspects of M1. You want directions, presumably as to how the matter is to be progressed - - -

MS LUCK: Directions and also to - - -

HER HONOUR: - - - and then you want me to make an order dispensing with the time rules, but that really is a matter that will have to be considered by the Full Bench when your appeal is listed.

MS LUCK: Your Honour, there was no way that I could - I needed to speak to a judge in regard to getting directions in regard to the matters that are all underneath this appeal, which are - and if you have a look at the names - - -

HER HONOUR: But those matters are not before me, Ms Luck.

MS LUCK: Well, they would have been if I had been able to file my documents today.

HER HONOUR: A whole lot of them, as I understand - - -

MS LUCK: I do - I understand that when - - -

HER HONOUR: - - - have been deemed abandoned. I do not know. I do not know what the situation is.

MS LUCK: Well, that was what I was coming to, I am sorry. Thank you for bringing me back to that.

HER HONOUR: I do not know what the situation is, but there is nothing I can do about those matters. Now, you must concentrate on M11 of 2001 and the three issues you raise in your notice of motion - - -

MS LUCK: Your Honour, excuse me. Could you indulge me for a moment. I just have to get a document out. I understand that I needed to notify you of the sort of orders that I was seeking. Now, I filed that on 5 November when I had come straight from a settlement conference with the parties in the Queensland case. Now, because of the blatant infliction of torture upon me and in pain and suffering of the parties to that, the respondents and the lawyers involved, I have had no choice now but to ask or request that these persons be added to the matter of the original writ that I was - - -

HER HONOUR: I understand that, but until that writ is issued you cannot do anything to it.

MS LUCK: I understand that also. Your Honour, I have been denied every opportunity that should have been given to me when I filed documents, notices of motion, to have a hearing about the matters that I have put in my notices of motion and I have not been given any - I have never had one return date given to me. I understand that I am a self-represented litigant and I also understand that courts are not usually very indulgent to self-represented litigants, and even in my special leave application I could not get into the Court to have it heard before - it goes back to the hearing of Justice Weinberg who conducted himself beyond the jurisdiction of the court. From what I understand of this High Court, the High Court is the supreme court of Australia, and in that anything that touches on any of the matters that I bring to this Court, I have a right to at least have some sort of consideration of those matters included. In my circumstances, being ill and being constantly under duress because of these issues that I brought to the court and was denied the rights, I have brought this matter under the Human Rights Acts and the human rights law in this country and I would like to get some sort of direction in regard to the issues that touch on this or the actions of those responsible for the torture of me. Unless I bring these issues to the Court to you today to at least have them considered or some of the issues - because I would like to issue a writ or an order nisi in a writ of prohibition and certiorari against Federal Court Justice Weinberg and that is the No 1 hope that I have, that will be at least reviewed in light of the fact that I have - - -

HER HONOUR: I have not got anything concerning Justice Weinberg before me today. I do not even know if you have filed anything, apart from the special leave applications, which apparently got out of time, did they?

MS LUCK: Ms Rogers indicated that you were aware that I had attempted to file these yesterday actually and - - -

HER HONOUR: And there is something wrong with the forms, is that not right?

MS LUCK: Well, there was not anything, as far as I can see, that was of any real major concern. Anyway, I am not suggesting that Ms Rogers is, you know, making it up or anything. I am just suggesting that there was minor error in the way that I have worded it, because I have never made out a writ of certiorari and prohibition. So I was hoping that that would be filed and in front of you this morning, along with all of the certificates of identifying exhibits which are evidence of all the matters that I have outlined in my affidavit here, which I would like and have requested - - -

HER HONOUR: Now, all I have before me - all I can have before me is matter M11 of 2001.

MS LUCK: Well, would you indulge me, your Honour, and be so - - -

HER HONOUR: It is not a question of indulging. If I have not got it before me - - -

MS LUCK: Well, can I give you my documents, because I have just put them in and Ms Rogers said that they were going up to the Court to you.

HER HONOUR: No, Ms Luck, there are rules by which courts must proceed and unless the rules are complied with, I can do nothing; I am powerless.

MS LUCK: Well, I have applied the rules and if you would not mind, I just want to get a.....out, thank you. I have been unable to write - your Honour, on 19 November, or close to that date, prior to that date, I spoke to Ms Rogers and Ms Rogers contacted me to find out what orders I should have listed in my chamber summons for a directions hearing and as I explained to her that I am just incapable of writing any more or standing at a computer. I have filed a document, which is my statement of loss and damage in the Queensland matter, which clearly identifies the problems that exist in regard to my mobility disabilities and the pain that I experience.

HER HONOUR: Yes, I have that.

MS LUCK: Yes, your Honour, I am sure. In that I was forced to spend - because my lawyers, unethically and unprofessionally, withdrew from my matter at a time after which the respondents, or the defendants in this case, had sought to have a settlement conference, get a date for it, and were going to take it to the court and have it ordered that I provide a particularised statement of loss and damage. My lawyers, after having received that, withdrew. I was forced to do the work myself, which took me several months. As you can see, it is a fairly extensive document that covers an enormous amount of work, and it was also - because I have been homeless I have been forced to live in caravan parks in the most dire circumstances. I have not been able to keep my matters and all my personal things in order. It was a very, very hard job to find all those documents and to actually put that document together, that statement of loss and damage.

Now, that coincided with them, the defendant and the lawyers, their representatives, getting me to come to the court - well, not getting me to come to the court, sorry - getting me to come to Brisbane, cost me a lot of money to go there to find that they had not done what they said they would do, which was provide a person who was responsible for making - or authorised to make final decisions in the matter. So it cost me $1000-odd. I was in great pain because travelling by plane is extremely uncomfortable for me, as is travelling in any transport, and they did not have anybody there who was authorised to make final decisions. They have not in fact since then provided me with a statement of their contentions to the statement of loss and damage, or notice of contentions. In fact, they treated me in the most abominable way. I asked them to have something for me to stand - so I could work on something at a height suitable for me. They shut me in a little room with no windows and had a cardboard box. I am just trying to explain to you why - - -

HER HONOUR: Now, Ms Luck, you are going to have to come sooner or later to concentrate on the matter that is before me.

MS LUCK: I was getting to that, your Honour. So when I came - - -

HER HONOUR: Well, you have taken half an hour and you have not yet got to the matter that is before me.

MS LUCK: Because, your Honour, I would like you to read my affidavit and I have made certain requests in that affidavit that - - -

HER HONOUR: I cannot deal with those requests. I can only deal with the matter that is before me.

MS LUCK: It says under Order 52 of the High Court Rules, rule 15:

(1) In a proceeding when a party makes an application at Chambers, either by way of summons or otherwise, he may include in the same application all matters upon which he then desires the order or direction of the Justice.

(2) [Order as just] Upon the hearing of the application, the Justice may make such order and give such directions relevant to or consequential on the matter of the application as are just.

Your Honour, that is what I am attempting to do, is to bring to touch upon those matters and that are consequential, which they are consequential.

HER HONOUR: Ms Luck, you tell me that. You have filed a notice of appeal. The notice of appeal has been accepted, it has been filed in the Registry. Now - - -

MS LUCK: There are documents down there that should be on your - - -

HER HONOUR: I do not know about that. A matter comes before me because it has been properly filed and steps have to be taken to have that matter determined. Now, if and when, but I say if and when, you were to succeed in the appeal and a writ would be issued, then there would be a properly constituted matter in this Court to which perhaps you could join other matters and so forth. At this stage, there is a proper notice of appeal. If appropriate steps are taken, it can be listed before three members of this Court. Now, I do not know what is in those files but, as I understand it, a number of them have not been filed even. So they are not matters, they are not proceedings in the Court - - -

MS LUCK: Your Honour, could I ask you to apply the same rules as I have sought to have the other justices and the courts and the registrars apply to me. I am a disabled person and under the Disability Discrimination Act and under the Disability Services Act and under the ICCPR, the International Covenant of Civil and Political Rights, there are rules that - well, they are not rules actually in the ICCPR, but I have a right to be equal before the law and that - - -

HER HONOUR: If you would just concentrate on M11, I will tell you how to get that matter listed so that you can have a hearing before three Justices, but I cannot do that with any of the other matters.

MS LUCK: Your Honour, can I not bring, as a matter of one of the parties - Justice Weinberg is one of the parties under M134 which this appeal is in regard to, a number of about 40-odd identities. Justice Weinberg is one of them and in that I have had all forms of gross acts of torture committed by judges in the Federal Court, I have been denied access to the rights under which this appeal is made and I am a disabled person and I am unable to write and to do all the documents. I did not come to this Court or any court and represent myself because I chose to; I came because I had such difficulty getting a lawyer to do anything that was ethical or not make such errors that they were going to be detrimental to me. I was unable to obtain a lawyer in these matters because Legal Aid does not provide legal aid to litigants who are in civil matters. So I have no choice but to bring it myself and when I brought the issues in the Federal Court, it progressively got worse and worse to the point where I was unable to work, unable to do anything to do with my cases and matters. I wrote to everybody in regard to that.

Now, in this matter I had - and I was getting on to the letter that I sent in which I outlined those two rules, the orders - Order 52, rule 15, which I hoped would have some bearing on the way that you view my affidavit and my - I was refused to file documents this morning. That was it. I was refused to file them again, and there was not an error bad enough to have not filed it.

HER HONOUR: Even if you had filed it I could not hear it. I can only hear what is listed, and what is listed is M11 of 2001. Now, do you want to have that matter heard - - -

MS LUCK: Of course I want to have it heard, but - - -

HER HONOUR: - - -by three Justices of this Court?

MS LUCK: Your Honour, I do want to have that heard.

HER HONOUR: Well, why do we not concentrate on what is necessary to get that heard?

MS LUCK: Because I would like to be able to get the issues that are below, some of the issues - because my matters have all been dismissed without due consideration for my rights in the courts below and all these legal matters that I bring to the courts, I am the plaintiff and the applicant and I am suffering so much because of the acts of these persons I am trying to get some justice for that I have no opportunity - I have not been given an opportunity to be heard in the court by the High Court and I was - - -

HER HONOUR: I am trying to take the steps now to give you an opportunity to be heard by three Justices in relation to your appeal. If you were to succeed in that appeal, then your writ would be filed and you would be able to serve it and you would be able to have a hearing of that matter.

MS LUCK: But that does not have any effect on the issues that I bring to the Court today under this M11. All these issues are directly related to the acts of these judges beneath. This appeal is related to those acts. This affidavit that I have put in this morning and have sworn which you should have before you because - - -

HER HONOUR: Yes, I have that.

MS LUCK: Now, in there - I have sat up all night preparing this document with all the copies of all this evidence of the issues that I would like you to address today.

HER HONOUR: Well, I cannot. I have already told you that, Ms Luck.

MS LUCK: So, in other words, this rule that - - -

HER HONOUR: I can deal with M11.

MS LUCK: I believe that your jurisdiction covers anything that touches on it.

HER HONOUR: Look, until you have this appeal progressed, this is not a matter in this Court. Until you have that writ served, there is not a matter. Now - - -

MS LUCK: So, if I want to come up and have these issues dealt with - because they need to be dealt with before I have the appeal dealt with because I cannot do the work, your Honour. Now, I do not know - I wanted to have some sort of consideration of my situation. I appreciate that the High Court is very pressed for time and suchlike but, considering that I have not been heard once in regard to any of these issues, the notice of motion, in fact, in relation to this, and I would ask you to consider this notice of motion which has been filed under M11. I have not been able to prepare myself properly for everything either.

I wanted to make a written submission of the issues I wanted to address today but I was - it was necessary for me to file these documents regardless of that. I also would like to bring your attention to a matter that relates to the Registry of the High Court and some evidence that I have produced and written in all my certificates of identifying exhibits and in paragraph 9 "GL26". There I have copies of - I have called myself the applicant:

Copies of Applicant's letters to the High Court Registrar re inability to deal with matters due to homelessness & ill health. All matters M96, M97, M98, M99, M120, M121, M122, M123 of 2000 & M1 & M11 of 2001 + Proof of Delivery of handwritten letter of 23 March 2001 Australia Post.

Also on "GL27" over the page:

Copies of applicant's letters to the Federal Court Registrar re inability to deal with matters due to homelessness & ill health. All matters on 23 March 2001 - V392, V393, V394, V541, V603, V45 of 2000 + Proof of Delivery sheet from Australia Post. Other letters re V603 & V45 of 2000.

This High Court Registrar has apparently deemed my matters abandoned, M96 to M99 if I understand it, and it was quite obvious that that letter of 23 March - would you please hand up to her Honour - - -

HER HONOUR: I am familiar with that. They have been deemed abandoned.

MS LUCK: Yes, but unjustly, your Honour, because the letter sent to the Court clearly made it obvious that I had not abandoned it and I was actually letting them know that the issues were going to be continued but I was unable to progress them. These are all issues - - -

HER HONOUR: No. Ms Luck, there are rules in the Court. They have to be complied with. It does not matter - - -

MS LUCK: There are exceptions though.

HER HONOUR: - - - they are the rules. They are the rules. There are rules which enable you to take certain action or certain actions if you want to keep matters alive. They are the rules you must comply with. Now, I am not going to hear you on any matter other than the appeal in M11. If you do not concentrate on M11, I will put a time limit on how long you can talk and then I will make orders on the basis of what you say, but it is M11 you must concentrate on.

MS LUCK: Your Honour, then I will then read out to you, if you do not mind, the notice of motion that I filed in the Court on 31 January 2001 for M11 of 2001.

HER HONOUR: Yes, I have that.

MS LUCK: That:

pursuant to Order 64 rule 2 of the High Court Rules, that the appellant be relieved from the consequences of non-compliance with the rules in regard to the filing of the notice of appeal (in lieu of the special leave to appeal application - - -

HER HONOUR: Can I tell you what happens then. The practice there, Ms Luck, is that we get the matter - and this is standard procedure - we get the matter on for hearing and I could give you directions as to what you will have to address and you address - at the time you come before three Justices, you tell them as to why you are out of time. You are not very far out of time in this matter, are you? You are not.

MS LUCK: - I am over a year.

HER HONOUR: I do not think so.

MS LUCK: Well over a year, but anyway, look, your Honour - - -

HER HONOUR: I am sorry, let us stop there because this is a matter - in M11 of 2001 you filed the notice of appeal I think on 30 January 2001, did you not?

MS LUCK: That is correct, on 30 January 2001, which makes 2003 two years. But, anyway, I have sought the relief there. That is not the problem.

HER HONOUR: Okay.

MS LUCK: Can I go on please, your Honour? And I have not been able to progress it and that is why I keep writing it. It is to - first of all, the Registrar needs to know that too because that is what happens if I do not - I mean, it should not happen that it was abandoned because I was not abandoning it.

HER HONOUR: This is not abandoned.

MS LUCK: No, I know, but that is why I keep writing that because I make sure that I do not get it abandoned for that purpose. However, next paragraph 2:

That section 75(i) (iv) and (v) of the Constitution be invoked to grant effective remedies sought in the appellants writ of summons for certiorari, prohibition and a writ of Mandamus against the Officers of the Commonwealth, public officials of State Tribunals, applicants, respondents and their legal representatives to prevent the further torture of the Applicant.

That is basically already addressed in this issue and I have not had a hearing in regard to that. The third paragraph then says that - - -

HER HONOUR: Are you talking about M11?

MS LUCK: I am, the notice of motion in M11 of 2001 filed with the appeal. In the third paragraph I asked for:

That an URGENT stay of proceedings in the courts and tribunals below (as outlined in the attached exhibits, erroneous leave for appeal application M1 of 2001, filed on 2 January 2001, notice of appeal M11 of 2001, filed 30 January 2001 and writ of summons, attempted filing on 8th and 13th November 2000 [including attached letter/affidavits] in this matter) be granted until such time as the appeal and removal of causes (M120, M121, M122 and M123 of 2000) are heard.

And in the fourth paragraph I have stated:

That the appellant be allowed from this day onward to file and serve documents related to High Court of Australia matters by facsimile or ordinary mail, due to her disabled and impecunious circumstances.

And on 5 I have stated:

That the appellant, due to the seriousness of her ill health, have her reasonable requests for adjournments, consultation on management of her matters and time frames sought for filing of documents of submissions, be considered in light of her disabled and impecunious status.

And 6:

That any Medical Certificates or Reports provided, for the purpose of disclosing the appellant's current health status and special needs, be properly considered and time allowed for her treatment, rest, recovery, and recuperation, as is due in any human being with serious and life threatening illness.

And 7:

That the appellant's request (made without personal prejudice and with the greatest of respect) that His Honour, Mr Justice Kirby, be disqualified from the hearing of this matter M11 of 2001 and related matters, because of his self declared "Gay" status which could prejudice the appellant's case regarding a libellous cause of action covered by the Writ of Summons proposed for issue, facts disclosed in paragraphs 29 - - -

HER HONOUR: Now, they are all orders which you seek consequential upon - which, to the extent that they could be made, could only be made consequential upon the filing of the writ. The commencement of a proceeding in the original jurisdiction in this Court. You have to get through this appeal before you get to the filing of a writ and before you can have - - -

MS LUCK: These matters are also before the Court under M96 to 99, and that - - -

HER HONOUR: No, they are not before me.

MS LUCK: No, but they have been filed, your Honour, as have the removal applications in M20 to M23. In regard to this order that I have sought, that - - -

HER HONOUR: The matter that is before me is the notice of motion that was filed, I think, on 5 November this year.

MS LUCK: No 2 is the very serious one, and this is what I am here today trying to get done, because this ongoing torture - after I filed this on 31 January, there were further hearings, further dismissals of my matters. I have been forced into homelessness again and again. I have further been subjected to fibreglass and asbestos poisoning. I have had my rights - and every single mode of my life has been impinged on by these actions of the court and the publication, your Honour, of these matters dismissed without just hearing or anything else.

Also some of the other issues, in particular, the one about the "Gay", that my name was incorrectly spelt "Gay" in a matter in the Supreme Court of Victoria, and that judge is one of the defendants in the writ that I am seeking to issue. These are libellous and they have caused me to have the most unbelievable suffering due to people being able to access all those false and unjust judgments made dismissing my cases, claiming that I was vexatious and frivolous. None of my matters have been vexatious and frivolous and, in fact, a person's life is certainly not a frivolous or vexatious nature. I sought these certioraris now, and that I have actually got the documents, I have filed the documents today or tried to file them yesterday - - -

HER HONOUR: All right. I told you before - - -

MS LUCK: And I want to have my life protected, your Honour.

HER HONOUR: I told you before, Ms Luck, we are dealing with - - -

MS LUCK: Well, this is - - -

HER HONOUR: - - - a motion dated 5 November 2002, being an appeal from a decision of the Chief Justice. Now, there were two - - -

MS LUCK: And this is the matter that was.....with it - - -

HER HONOUR: Yes, I know that.

MS LUCK: - - - was filed with that - - -

HER HONOUR: No, it was filed a long time ago.

MS LUCK: - - - filed with the appeal.

HER HONOUR: I do not think that is right.

MS LUCK: Yes, it was done the day that I filed the appeal and I had to resubmit it the day after. But it was done at the time of the appeal, on 30 January when the appeal was filed, and 31 January 2001 was the notice of motion.

HER HONOUR: Yes. Well, I can tell you, I have no jurisdiction to deal with orders of that kind ex parte. It simply cannot be done. Now - - -

MS LUCK: Perhaps, your Honour, you could tell me why I have not been - that I would really like to know, that in two years - no, it was more, actually - over two years - I have sought hearings and I have sought to be protected by the High Court on several occasions under human rights issues and under section 75 - - -

HER HONOUR: Now, Ms Luck, you have 15 minutes from this moment to address the three issues raised - - -

MS LUCK: Okay, your Honour.

HER HONOUR: - - - by the notice of motion of 5 November.

MS LUCK: Your Honour, there are several issues that need to be addressed in regard to the hearing of that matter. Firstly, his Honour the Chief Justice said in his judgment that I showed no cause. There were complaints, but there were not any causes. Now, what I would like to know, if you would not mind, your Honour, is when I make that submission and I have the appeal heard, it seems to me that I am going to have to go through each and every single one of these entities, what I believe is the cause of the matter, to have the Court of Appeal decide it. Would that be correct?

HER HONOUR: I cannot tell you that but, ordinarily, you would be confined to what appears on the document that you sought to issue. The issue would be whether the document which you wanted to issue disclosed a cause of action against all or any of the persons named and whether, if it did, that cause of action was one within the original jurisdiction of this Court.

MS LUCK: So - look, I am sorry. If you would not mind indulging me, your Honour. I need to - if I prepare a submission for the appeal and I do not go through each and every single entity's.....the information and the facts relating to each court - - -

HER HONOUR: No, the information and the facts are beside the point. It is what is disclosed in the document that you wanted to file.

MS LUCK: Well, your Honour, in this particular appeal it is for human rights breaches and in particular under the Crimes (Torture) Act 2004 . Now, if his Honour is saying that there is no cause, then would it not be necessary - being a self-represented litigant, and believe me, your Honour, I did not know one thing about the law before I had to do this and I have managed to find my way through it reasonably well even though I have had not one scrap of help from anybody, but I would be grateful if you could let me have some idea of whether that is what I would be expected to submit in detail.

HER HONOUR: You will be expected to make your submissions as to what is disclosed by the document.

MS LUCK: That seems - okay, thank you. I presume that I will then have to go through each and every one of them which requires me to do a lot of work. As I also - - -

HER HONOUR: It is a question of what is disclosed by the document.

MS LUCK: Well, I maintain that the document - there was plenty of cause disclosed but his Honour judged it not to be and he also - anyway, I just felt that that was a necessity to ask you about that in regard to the - because if I prepare a matter then I would like to seek leave from you to obviously provide a submission greater than 20 pages, which I think is the rule, is that correct? Would you give me leave to file a longer document than the 20 pages in the appeal?

HER HONOUR: Well, that at least can be done.

MS LUCK: Yes. There are some other issues in regard to interpretations - - -

HER HONOUR: Can we come back to that. When could you have your submissions ready by?

MS LUCK: Your Honour, I have written and I have made it - - -

HER HONOUR: If I specify dates now, they will be binding.

MS LUCK: That is right, and I am afraid I am exhausted. I cannot do any more work. I cannot stand at the computer any more. I cannot get any help. I have been denied access to voice recognition software and hardware from the university where I am a student. Excuse me, your Honour.

HER HONOUR: When could - if I were to, say, give you three months, would that be sufficient?

MS LUCK: Your Honour, I need three months rest, and I could perhaps - look, I believe that my document - when I put my arguments, and I put them in my notice of appeal, your Honour, in the notice of appeal I have been fairly extensive in my seeking of grounds. But that is why I am seeking to ask you about the issue in regard to the causes because that makes a big difference to the way that the case is heard, firstly, and I understand with my little knowledge that when one makes an appeal it is very often the appeal and the issues are dealt with at the same time. In that respect, if I am to do that then I would have to have a lot longer. That is basically it.

HER HONOUR: The only issues that will be before the Full Bench are whether time should be extended, firstly; secondly, whether the document that you sought to file discloses an arguable cause of action, not whether you would win but whether it discloses a claim that is recognised by the law; thirdly, if it discloses a claim that is recognised by the law, is it a claim within the original jurisdiction of this Court? They are the only matters that will be - - -

MS LUCK: Your Honour, I obviously believe that to be so, otherwise I would not - - -

HER HONOUR: I know you do, but so far others have not believed it to be true.

MS LUCK: Well, I do not know whether it is a belief, your Honour, I think it is something else. Sorry. But anyway, I would like to have it heard but it comes to other things too. There is the issue of the treaties that I think need interpretation before the hearing, because these are treaties - like the Convention Against Torture, the CAT is the treaty, Convention Against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment incorporated in the Crimes Act.

Now, this is, I believe, why it has been refused, because we have issues regarding the treaties which are arguable and I do not know whether that is as much an important factor here as it is the Disability Discrimination Act, which incorporates the declaration of the rights of disabled people, because that is definitely an issue which has not been incorporated - the treaty has been incorporated in the Disability Discrimination Act but the one clause, or the one paragraph in that declaration that has not been incorporated is that a disabled person is entitled to protection from discriminatory regulations and abuse and suchlike. I have not got it right in front of me at the moment, but that particular clause in the treaty has not been incorporated and I fear that is what happened to me. That is why this matter has been - I tried to issue this writ, is because I have not been protected from the law by any of the courts, including the High Court, when I have sought to be protected. As a disabled person, that is my right and I would like to ask you to perhaps give me some help in regard to the interpretation of that - - -

HER HONOUR: Now, your 15 minutes time is running. I have told you what the issues will be in the Full Court. That is as much as I can tell you. Clearly there will have to be, before the matter can proceed to a hearing, a summary of written argument filed. I could dispense with that if you wanted - - -

MS LUCK: A summary of - - -

HER HONOUR: Written argument.

MS LUCK: I think that would be - I would prefer to have to write it, though, as you say, it might be better in my case now - - -

HER HONOUR: No, you have a right to a hearing.

MS LUCK: Yes, though, as you say, it might be better in this instance because I have great difficulty writing at the moment and it might be - - -

HER HONOUR: You will have to file a written summary of argument before the hearing anyway - the rules require that - so that people can read up before the matter is heard. You will have to prepare an appeal book. Now, I can give you times today in which to do that and when you have the appeal books prepared and filed and a written summary of argument, if you wish it to be more than 20 pages I can make an order allowing for that, otherwise it will be restricted to 20 pages.

MS LUCK: I would prefer not to be restricted if I could, your Honour, because it is a complex matter with one cause that many people - - -

HER HONOUR: When those steps are taken, the matter will be listed for hearing. Now, do you want me to set time limits for you to do those?

MS LUCK: Honestly, your Honour, I cannot think about doing any work at all for at least a couple of months. I just am incapable.

HER HONOUR: Well then, the delay - - -

MS LUCK: That is another matter. You see, your Honour, I have to deal with this other matter as well and I am going to have to go to Queensland to do that.

HER HONOUR: You want this matter dealt with?

MS LUCK: This appeal?

HER HONOUR: Yes.

MS LUCK: Well, I would prefer to wait actually, because I have all these other issues in the Federal Court that I believe need to be settled and I will be certainly be filing these certiorari writs and I will have to have another hearing, I will have to come up here for another hearing, and that is what I will be hoping, that, okay, I have not achieved that today, but I will be up here as soon as there is a next hearing, so I would like to be able to get a hearing date for that, your Honour, because they are issues that need - to me, to prepare my appeal, I believe that these issues need to be addressed first, and I appreciate you cannot deal with it today.

HER HONOUR: No, but I do not even think that is right. The only question, as I have tried to explain to you, is whether the document you filed as a writ of summons arguably discloses a cause of action for which there is a legal remedy and, if it does so, whether the matter is one within the jurisdiction of this Court. Now, do you understand what I mean?

MS LUCK: Yes.

HER HONOUR: When one says "a cause of action", what one is talking about are facts which, if proven, entitle you to a legal remedy. Now, there will be no issue as to whether you can prove any of the facts before the Full Bench. The only issue will be whether the matters you have set out in your summons are matters which entitle you to a legal remedy from this Court. Do you understand that?

MS LUCK: Yes, I do. I do understand, your Honour. There is a problem, though, in this particular appeal, because it is under the Crimes (Torture) Act, and under the Crimes (Torture) Act it specifies that before anyone can be prosecuted under that Act, the permission of the Attorney-General must be sought and gained. But he is one of the defendants in the matter that I am trying to bring, and this has me in confusion here, because I am not sure how that then works. I am sorry.

HER HONOUR: Well, there is a more important question - more fundamental question: whether that Act entitles you to proceed in this Court by way of civil proceedings. You see, these are civil proceedings that you have instituted.

MS LUCK: Well, obviously, I have sought civil proceedings because I could not get any of the people who were supposed to prosecute to do anything about it.

HER HONOUR: Exactly. So the question is whether the law allows civil proceedings in respect of which you could be granted relief in this Court. I have explained that to you. I can - - -

MS LUCK: There are - - -

HER HONOUR: If you do not want me to take the steps today that will get this matter a hearing, I will not. I will simply dismiss the notice of motion that you filed.

MS LUCK: Your Honour, I would rather you did not do that.

HER HONOUR: Well, then - - -

MS LUCK: I would prefer to get something settled, and in regard to this issue, there were other issues that I brought there too, because under this particular Act, the Crimes (Torture) Act - - -

HER HONOUR: Well, let me tell you - - -

MS LUCK: - - - but also the issues of the treaties, your Honour. You see - - -

HER HONOUR: That is for the Full Bench.

MS LUCK: Yes, I understand, but in regard to the treaties that - well, the Acts of Parliament, the legislation, which is also the Disability Discrimination Act the Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Commission Act, these Acts do entitle me to bring to the Court, because those treaties have been incorporated by those Acts.

HER HONOUR: Yes, but the question is whether those Acts entitle you to bring proceedings in this Court for civil relief.

MS LUCK: If they are under the original jurisdiction of the High Court - - -

HER HONOUR: Well, these are matters I cannot debate with you, because - - -

MS LUCK: No, because they are the issues that I have been discussing or debating - - -

HER HONOUR: They are the issues you have to take up with the Full Bench.

MS LUCK: Absolutely. Constitutional issues, which - - -

HER HONOUR: All right. Now, the first thing you have to do - to get this matter on, you have to prepare an appeal book and you have to file a written summary of argument.

MS LUCK: By the end of January, your Honour?

HER HONOUR: No. I am prepared to say - if you tell me what time you require, I am prepared to make a date that will enable you to get matters ready, if you want to go to - if I were to say you are to file your written outline of argument by 1 May 2004, that gives you a fair amount of time, does it not?

MS LUCK: ?

HER HONOUR: 2003, I am sorry.

MS LUCK: I will be dead by then. Sorry. I will get a transcript from this, will I, your Honour?

HER HONOUR: Yes.

MS LUCK: Thank you.

HER HONOUR: But I am asking you now, can you manage to have that done by 1 May 2003?

MS LUCK: Your Honour, these issues about this - look, I am sorry - - -

HER HONOUR: A simple yes or no.

MS LUCK: - - - but I have to bring this in, because this is one of the issues. It is about the publication of, in particular, that one - these are not stopped. These are being published daily - well, they are published to anywhere in the world, on the Internet, and this particular appeal has a bearing on these publications. Now, these publications have caused my family, my friends, anybody who has had access to those documents to vilify - I have been vilified by them.

HER HONOUR: Now, I cannot deal with that.

MS LUCK: No, I know, your Honour, but that is why I am trying to get the - - -

HER HONOUR: You are not answering the question I asked. Can you have a written summary of argument prepared by 1 May 2003?

MS LUCK: Possibly, your Honour, most likely. If I am set the date then I will attempt to do it, but I probably - - -

HER HONOUR: No, if I set the date, you have to do it.

MS LUCK: Yes.

HER HONOUR: If I tell you 1 June, will you be certain?

MS LUCK: 1 May will be all right - no, actually, it is a bad time, because I have to study as well. I would prefer it earlier. I would prefer to do it before the end of the year, before the beginning of the new semester which is in the beginning of the year, so before the end of February.

HER HONOUR: Well, you tell me what date you want.

MS LUCK: Before the end of February I want to have the hearing.

HER HONOUR: No, you cannot have a hearing then. All the hearing dates are gone in February. What I am asking you to do is to file a written submission and what you will then have to do is prepare the appeal books. When those two steps have been taken, you will get the next available place in the list before a Full Bench. That is what happens.

MS LUCK: I have got so many other matters I have to deal with. I do not know whether I can do it or not, I really do not, and in this instance - - -

HER HONOUR: Until you have filed a written summary of argument and prepared appeal books, nothing will happen in this matter.

MS LUCK: I mean, I know that it does not matter to you whether I do it earlier or not. I would prefer you give me a date that I can - I like to work towards a date. I do not want to be stuck in the middle worrying about in July all through my semester that I am going to be worried about that, so I would rather submit a written one earlier.

HER HONOUR: Very well. I will order you put in written submissions by 1 March 2003. Those submissions should set out briefly why you say time should be extended, just attaching the letters or copies or referring to them, but then they should set out an argument that the matters raised in the writ of summons you attempted to file entitle you to relief from this Court in civil proceedings. That is what the argument should be directed to. Then, unfortunately, the appeal books will have to be prepared and in those appeal books you gather up all the documents you will want to refer to.

MS LUCK: Your Honour, in my circumstances, I know I have to provide three, four - how many have I got to provide in this case? There will only be three, will there?

HER HONOUR: I do not know - six.

MS LUCK: Well, in this matter, we cannot have 10 - I mean, we cannot have six, seven.

HER HONOUR: Seven?

MS LUCK: Your Honour, you would be aware that I - it is not possible to have seven in this matter because there are three Judges that have dealt with it already.

HER HONOUR: No, the appeal books.

MS LUCK: Yes, but is not that one for, like - that you normally set to accommodate the number of Judges, is not it?

HER HONOUR: You will get three Judges. Now, what normally happens is there is a book for each of the Justices who are sitting, one has to stay in the Registry file at all times, and one - - -

MS LUCK: For me.

HER HONOUR: One for the Court reporter and one archive copy, but in your case we could probably, say, limit it to five.

MS LUCK: I cannot afford to publish them. Even that is - I mean, there is a heck of a lot of documents, your Honour. Is it possible - because I have filed appeal books that relate to all this already, would it be possible to - well, relate all this - oh, I see, it is a different story.

HER HONOUR: I will tell you what is essential. What is essential is the writ that you tried to file, a copy of the writ, the judgment of Chief Justice Gleeson and your notice of appeal. That is all that is essential, is it not? That is all that is essential for these books.

MS LUCK: So anything else I add is at my own discretion and cost, yes, I understand, and costly.

HER HONOUR: Yes.

MS LUCK: All right, yes, I will just have to find it, will not I, borrow more money off Mastercard or something?

HER HONOUR: The matter cannot proceed unless you file those - - -

MS LUCK: No, I understand. I have filed enough of them already and they were not - - -

HER HONOUR: Can you do that within 28 days of filing your written submissions?

MS LUCK: Yes.

HER HONOUR: Did I say 1 March? Well, I will say by the - - -

MS LUCK: I am going to regret this, am I not?

HER HONOUR: I am sorry, I will - - -

MS LUCK: Look, I am really getting worried now because I am thinking about the time frame and then I will not have had any rest. Oh, God.

HER HONOUR: The work will have been done once you have made your written submissions. That is the work part.

MS LUCK: Yes. For me the photocopying and all that is hard work, I can tell you, even the - - -

HER HONOUR: But I am telling you at this stage all you have to do is include the writs you tried to file, the Chief Justice's judgment which is short and your notice of appeal.

MS LUCK: Okay.

HER HONOUR: And you do not have to have them bound. You will have to provide three copies of those documents to the Court, do you - five copies, and then the books will be bound in the Registry for you. Simple books of that kind can be bound in the Registry for you.

MS LUCK: I have the bindings. If there is one thing I have already spent on it is all the bindings, so that is not a problem.

HER HONOUR: Well, you can sort that out in due course.

MS LUCK: No, that is all right.

HER HONOUR: Now, that really should not be a big job. When those two steps are taken, I direct the Registrar to give you the next available date for hearing - it will be heard in Canberra - and I will give you leave to make your written submissions of whatever length you like, not exceeding though, I think, 50 pages.

MS LUCK: I probably will get it into 20, but I mean it is not a - - -

HER HONOUR: Yes, and finally, I give you leave at the hearing to rely on, subject to their relevance to the issues, such other documents, but it will be for the Full Court to rule on their relevance providing you have five copies of those documents in Court on the day. Do you understand that?

MS LUCK: Yes.

HER HONOUR: Now, that should save you a lot of - - -

MS LUCK: Thank you very much, your Honour.

HER HONOUR: Now, otherwise I have to dismiss the summons. I will make those orders and otherwise dismiss the summons because the time question just has to be dealt with by that Full Bench.

MS LUCK: So, what do you mean you have to dismiss this? Do you dismiss that part of the summons?

HER HONOUR: Yes.

MS LUCK: You are just going to dismiss the whole summons?

HER HONOUR: No, I am going to make - - -

MS LUCK: I do not want another dismissed matter. I am here today. I mean it is not dismissible, is it, your Honour? I mean, I have sought - - -

HER HONOUR: The trouble is this, Ms Luck. I cannot make that order about time. That has to be dealt with by the Full Bench. The order joining the extra parties can only be made if and when you establish that you are entitled to relief from this Court in respect of that summons.

MS LUCK: Yes, your Honour, I appreciate that.

HER HONOUR: I can simply stand it over sine die if you would prefer that.

MS LUCK: Sorry.

HER HONOUR: I can adjourn it sine die.

MS LUCK: Yes, to another day, is it not?

HER HONOUR: Yes, but it is no fixed day.

MS LUCK: I would like, your Honour, to be able to get the requests I made today to have these other matters heard. When can I do that? Can I get leave to file these writs of certiorari?

HER HONOUR: I cannot give you leave.

MS LUCK: Well, am I going to be - I mean, I do not want to go through all this. I have been waiting two years for a hearing, your Honour, and I would like to be able to - - -

HER HONOUR: You will get your hearing on M11 as soon as you do the things I have said.

MS LUCK: But it is more than M11.

HER HONOUR: Okay. As to the other matters, you will have to discuss them in the Registry because I do not know what has been filed in the sense of accepted and I do not know what procedures have or have not been taken in these matters and you can go to the Registry, sort all that out and see if there is any way you can get those listed.

MS LUCK: Yes, your Honour, because I would like to get some of them prohibited from further damaging my life. It is a very serious problem and I do not have any - - -

HER HONOUR: Let me just tell you, an order cannot be made in those terms as such. You will have to ask - - -

MS LUCK: I understand that, but the orders that I have sought are not in those terms. They are proper orders appropriate to - - -

HER HONOUR: They are matters that you can take up with the Registry.

MS LUCK: Thank you very much, your Honour.

HER HONOUR: And I think at this stage the appropriate course is simply to adjourn sine die.

MS LUCK: Thank you.

AT 10.50 AM THE MATTER WAS ADJOURNED