Brock v Minister for Home Affairs

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT 1 The appellant George Paul Brock has made application for leave to file an amended notice of appeal and for an order that the appeal be determined on written submissions only without any hearing. The respondent Minister consents to the appellant being granted leave to amend the notice of appeal and submits that the application for a hearing on the papers should be deferred until the written submissions are complete. 2 Leave is granted to the appellant to file an amended notice of appeal in accordance with the draft dated 9 October 2011. 3 Rule 36.41 of the Federal Court Rules 2011 identifies "applications which may be dealt with without an oral hearing". They do not include the hearing of an appeal. Rule 1.35 permits orders inconsistent with the Rules, but such an order would require a special occasion. A hearing presents a valuable opportunity for the Court to ask questions about written submissions even if the parties do not desire to add anything. In all the circumstances, the court does not propose to defer ruling on the application and proposes to refuse it. 4 This ruling does not prevent the appellant from confining his submissions to the content of his written submissions. The appellant should determine whether he does not wish to appear at all at the hearing and, if he does, whether he wishes to appear in person, or, if possible by video link. The appellant should, whatever the case may be, see that the Registry of the Court is informed of his wishes either directly or through the Metropolitan Remand and Reception Centre at Silverwater at the earliest opportunity. 5 In the circumstances the Court does not propose to make any order for costs. I certify that the preceding five (5) numbered paragraphs are a true copy of the Reasons for Judgment herein of the Honourable Justice Downes.