FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
JJ v Board of the Australian Crime Commission [2010] FCAFC 143
IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA | |
| Appellant | |
AND: | BOARD OF THE AUSTRALIAN CRIME COMMISSION First Respondent AUSTRALIAN CRIME COMMISSION Second Respondent JEFFREY ANDERSON Third Respondent |
DATE OF ORDER: | |
WHERE MADE: |
THE COURT ORDERS THAT:
1. The respondents’ application to tender further documents in the appeal be refused.
Note: Settlement and entry of orders is dealt with in Order 36 of the Federal Court Rules. The text of entered orders can be located using Federal Law Search on the Court’s website.
SOUTH AUSTRALIA DISTRICT REGISTRY | |
GENERAL DIVISION | NSD 742 of 2010 |
ON APPEAL FROM THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA |
BETWEEN: | JJ Appellant
|
AND: | BOARD OF THE AUSTRALIAN CRIME COMMISSION First Respondent AUSTRALIAN CRIME COMMISSION Second Respondent JEFFREY ANDERSON Third Respondent
|
JUDGES: | DOWSETT, COWDROY AND LOGAN JJ |
DATE: | 24 NOVEMBER 2010 |
PLACE: | ADELAIDE |
REASONS FOR JUDGMENT
DOWSETT J:
1 The respondents have applied for leave to tender a document entitled or, at least containing what are referred to as, “Facts, Contentions and Legal Submissions”. The document was not tendered at trial, despite the appellant and respondents having the opportunity to tender it. There is substantial discussion in the transcript of the trial relating to the non-tender of the document and the implications associated with that circumstance.
2 We note that the transcript is already part of the court record. We are concerned that, from a public point of view, it will look curious that this case should have been disposed of without reference to what appears to have become a central document in the proceedings. We are also concerned that interest in this case extends beyond the interests of the parties, and recognise that there is a substantial public interest in the matter being resolved in a way which will be satisfactory to the community as a whole. On the other hand, the parties made deliberate and informed decisions as to the conduct of the matter at first instance, and those decisions were that the document not be tendered in evidence.
3 The other matter to which considerable weight must be given is the assertion made by Mr Abbott that had the document been in evidence, he may have wished to cross-examine the examiner. That assertion is not capable of being easily dismissed. It seems to me to be quite likely that in the event that the document was tendered, he may have chosen to do so. In those circumstances, we could only receive it into evidence if we were also to extend to him the opportunity to cross-examine, subject to relevance. It is for that reason in particular that I would decline the application to tender the relevant document at this stage. I am strengthened in that view by the fact that the parties made informed decisions not to tender the document at the trial with whatever inferences we eventually decide may be drawn from those decisions. For those reasons, I would refuse the application.
I certify that the preceding three (3) numbered paragraphs are a true copy of the Reasons for Judgment herein of the Honourable Justice Dowsett. |
Associate:
IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA | |
SOUTH AUSTRALIA DISTRICT REGISTRY | |
GENERAL DIVISION | NSD 742 of 2010 |
ON APPEAL FROM THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA |
BETWEEN: | JJ Appellant
|
AND: | BOARD OF THE AUSTRALIAN CRIME COMMISSION First Respondent AUSTRALIAN CRIME COMMISSION Second Respondent JEFFREY ANDERSON Third Respondent
|
JUDGES: | DOWSETT, COWDROY AND LOGAN JJ |
DATE: | 24 NOVEMBER 2010 |
PLACE: | ADELAIDE |
REASONS FOR JUDGMENT
COWDROY J:
4 I agree.
I certify that the preceding one (1) numbered paragraph is a true copy of the Reasons for Judgment herein of the Honourable Justice Cowdroy. |
Associate:
Dated: 8 February 2011
IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA | |
SOUTH AUSTRALIA DISTRICT REGISTRY | |
GENERAL DIVISION | NSD 742 of 2010 |
ON APPEAL FROM THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA |
BETWEEN: | JJ Appellant
|
AND: | BOARD OF THE AUSTRALIAN CRIME COMMISSION First Respondent AUSTRALIAN CRIME COMMISSION Second Respondent JEFFREY ANDERSON Third Respondent
|
JUDGES: | DOWSETT, COWDROY AND LOGAN JJ |
DATE: | 24 NOVEMBER 2010 |
PLACE: | ADELAIDE |
REASONS FOR JUDGMENT
LOGAN J:
5 The absence of the document before the learned trial judge was as a result of deliberate forensic choice. It would not be appropriate in those circumstances to receive the document now. I agree with the presiding judge.
I certify that the preceding one (1) numbered paragraph is a true copy of the Reasons for Judgment herein of the Honourable Justice Logan. |
Associate:
Dated: 8 February 2011
