Harrison v Commissioner of Corrective Services (No 2)

On each occasion the matter has been listed before me, he has told me that he is waiting on Mr Beckett SC’s advice, and there are difficulties obtaining that advice. I need not detail all those difficulties. The matter was last before me on 9 June 2026, at which time there was again argument about whether the case could proceed and what would be happening with it. I stood it over for a month until today to give Mr Harrison one last opportunity to obtain the advice he seeks and indicate what he wished to do with the matter.

Prior to today, he provided the defendant with a motion seeking to vacate the hearing date of 21 July 2026. In support of that motion, he relies on an affidavit of a solicitor, Alexander Miller. The effect of the evidence is that Mr Beckett will not be able to provide advice within the required time, but he has organised someone else in his chambers, Mr Wilcox to give that advice. It is to be hoped that Mr Wilcox might be able to provide that advance sometime in August. As such, the plaintiff seeks to vacate the hearing date.

As I said to Mr Harrison today, if the hearing date is vacated and if, for example, the matter is relisted for directions at the end of August, he will not obtain a new hearing date until 2027. By that time, the defendant will have made a further decision about his status in prison. There seems little point in proceeding with an application to challenge earlier decisions when the defendant will make another decision in the meantime. Mr Harrison responds by saying that it may be that the earlier decisions are somewhat relevant and that he may wish to challenge those as well.

The defendant has offered to allow the plaintiff do discontinue these proceedings on the basis that each party pay its own costs, but on the condition that the plaintiff not raise any new proceedings as to earlier decisions which the defendant says are now irrelevant. The plaintiff refuses to agree to that suggestion. I spoke to the parties today about the merits of these proceedings being discontinued and if the plaintiff wishes to, the plaintiff commencing new proceedings later this year. That is a matter for him. He wishes to reserve his position subject to any issue of estoppel arising.

I understand that the plaintiff wishes to keep these proceedings on foot, so that he might amend his pleadings in due course; however, I must do justice between the parties. As I said to the plaintiff today, the defendant has the same right as him in terms of this litigation. In the circumstances, I encouraged the parties to find a way to resolve the current proceedings. I am not prepared to vacate the hearing date. In the circumstances, the motion on which the plaintiff relies is dismissed. I confirm the hearing date at 9:30am on 21 July 2026 (either before me or another judge). As I said, if the plaintiff is not able to proceed at that time, the result is inevitable. I will leave it to the parties to try and work out a way to resolve it.

Therefore, I make the following orders:

The plaintiff’s notice of motion dated 10 July 2026 is dismissed.

Confirm the hearing date of 21 July 2026.

List the matter at 9:30am on 21 July 2026.