Tram v Minister for Immigration, Citizenship and Multicultural Affairs [2019] HCATrans 117 (5 June 2019)

Last Updated: 6 June 2019

[2019] HCATrans 117

IN THE HIGH COURT OF AUSTRALIA

Office of the Registry
Melbourne No M167 of 2018

B e t w e e n -

NHUT KHA TRAM (NGUYEN THI NGOC DUNG AS HIS LITIGATION GUARDIAN)

Plaintiff

and

MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION, CITIZENSHIP AND MULTICULTURAL AFFAIRS

Defendant

NETTLE J

TRANSCRIPT OF PROCEEDINGS

AT MELBOURNE ON WEDNESDAY, 5 JUNE 2019, AT 9.24 AM

Copyright in the High Court of Australia
MS E.C. LAWSON: May it please the Court, I appear for the plaintiff. (instructed by Da Gama Pereira & Associates)

MR C.J. TRAN: May it please the Court, I appear on behalf of the defendant. (instructed by Australian Government Solicitor)

HIS HONOUR: I see that – at least as far as I can see, everything that needs to be done has been done. I just wanted to ask you, Ms Lawson, if I may, is it intended that the plaintiff will rely upon all of the affidavits of Lan Hoang, that is, the affidavit of 1 November 2018, the second affidavit of 11 April 2019 and the third of 31 May 2019?

MS LAWSON: Yes, your Honour.

HIS HONOUR: Thank you. Mr Tran, could I ask you, is it intended to crossexamine Ms Hoang on any or all of those affidavits?

MR TRAN: On all of those affidavits, your Honour.

HIS HONOUR: Thank you. Could I ask you whilst you are up, please, whether your side will be relying upon the affidavit of Mr Rogers?

MR TRAN: Yes, we will, your Honour.

HIS HONOUR: Also the two affidavits of Mr Curtis?

MR TRAN: Yes, your Honour, we will.

HIS HONOUR: Ms Lawson, may I ask you, is it intended to crossexamine Mr Rogers or Mr Curtis on any or all of those affidavits?

MS LAWSON: Your Honour, unfortunately, I do not have instructions on that specific point. I cannot imagine that we would receive instructions to the contrary.

HIS HONOUR: Thank you. Then what I propose is that each of you file and serve any notices to attend for crossexamination by 4.00 pm this coming Friday, 7 June. If there is nothing further, as it seems to me there is not, that the matter be set down for trial on 24 June 2019, beginning at 9.30 am. Mr Tran, does that cause any problem?

MR TRAN: No problem, your Honour. There had been some matters that I discussed with my instructor for programming of the trial, exchange of lists of objections and the agreed court book, but if your Honour is content to leave that with the defendant to manage with the plaintiff’s counsel I am sure we do not require orders.

HIS HONOUR: When did you propose exchanging lists of objections?

MR TRAN: I can hand up a draft order, your Honour.

HIS HONOUR: Thank you.

MR TRAN: It is not by consent because understandably the plaintiff’s counsel has not had an opportunity to seek instructions, I only provided this to her this morning, but I imagine it should not be controversial.

HIS HONOUR: Thank you, Mr Tran. Well, Ms Lawson, whilst I understand you do not consent I take it you do not oppose the list of objections?

MS LAWSON: Your Honour, I have actually just received instructions a short moment ago to consent to those proposed orders.

HIS HONOUR: Thank you.

I order that:

1. By 4.00 pm on 7 June 2019 each party file and serve any notice to attend for crossexamination.

2. By 4.00 pm on 14 June 2019 the parties exchange lists of objections to evidence.

3. By 4.00 pm on 18 June 2019 the plaintiff on behalf of both parties file and serve an agreed list of outstanding objections to evidence that identifies in one column the basis for objection and in another column the basis for pressing the proposed evidence.

4. By 4.00 pm on 20 June 2019 the defendant file and serve two copies of an agreed court book.

5. There be liberty to apply.

6. Each party’s costs of this day be reserved.

Nothing further?

MR TRAN: No, your Honour.

HIS HONOUR: Thank you both. I will adjourn now.

AT 9.28 AM THE MATTER WAS ADJOURNED