Repatriation - war widow's pension - summons to applicant to attend hearing by Repatriation Review Tribunal - objection by applicant's representative - request to have questions referred to Federal Court refused - writ of prohibition - whether issuing of summons capable of review - whether Tribunal may require applicant to attend to give evidence - investigative function of Tribunal Repatriation Act 1920 3s. 24AA, 107VC, 107VF, 107VG, 107VH, 107VU, 107VV, 1LO7VY, 107VZU Judiciary Act 1903 s.39B Application for a Writ of Mandamus against ROLAND PATRICK HASSELL, DESMOND MATTHEN TEHAN and STANLEY McLEISH HARRIS a Repatriation Review Tribunal Ex Parte: ELYS FRANCES NORMAN - Prosecutor THE COMMONWEALTH OF AUSTRALIA - Third Party No. WA G23 of 1984 c TOOHEY J. PERTH 2@ AUGUST 1984 IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA WESTERN AUSTRALIA DISTRICT REGISTRY GENERAL DIVISION J G_ORD) DATE OF ORDER WHERE MADE THE COURT ORDERS THAT: ) No. WA G23 of 1984 wwe wwe APPLICATION for a Writ of Mandamus against ROLAND PATRICK HASSELL, DESMOND MATTHEN § TEHAN and STANLEY McLEISH HARRIS a Repatriation Review Tribunal Ex Parte ELYS FRANCES NORMAN Prosecutor THE COMMONWEALTH OF AUSTRALIA Third Party RD R Toohey J. 20 August 1984 Perth 1. The application for a writ of prohibition against Roland Patrick Hassell, Desmond Matthew Tehan and Stanley McLeish Harris be dismissed. IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA WESTERN AUSTRALIA DISTRICT REGISTRY GENERAL DIVISION No. WA G23 of 1984 APPLICATION for a Writ of Mandamus against ROLAND PATRICK HASSELL, DESMOND MATTHEN TEHAN and STANLEY McLEISH HARRIS, a Repatriation Review Tribunal Ex Parte ELYS NO. Prosecutor THE COMMONWEALTH OF AUSTRALIA Third Party CORAM: TOOHEY J. 20 August 1984 REASONS FOR JUDGMENT This is an application for a writ of prohibition against the members of the Repatriation Review Tribunal established by the Repatriation Act 1920. I have just delivered reasons for fudgment in a similar application made by Mrs. Pride against the same members of the Tribunal. I did so on the basis of written submissions which, it was agreed, would apply to the present application. I adopt what I said in my reasons for judgment in the application brought by Mrs. Pride and, for those reasons, Mrs. Norman's application must be dismissed. I certify that this and the preceding page is a true copy of the Reasons for Judgment herein of his Honour Mr. Justice Toohey ; 7 A / Ait Ltiw OAM 4 Co " \ '. Associate Dated: 20 August 1984