Attorney General v Foster [1999] FCA 81

FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

Attorney-General v Foster [1999] FCA 81 EXTRADITION – validity of warrant for surrender issued by Minister for Justice on behalf of the Attorney-General – whether s 19 of the Acts Interpretation Act 1901 (Cth) enables the Minister for Justice to act for or on behalf of the Attorney-General – whether assent of the Prime Minister or Cabinet is necessary – application of s 19 – whether section is an interpretative tool or has substantive effect – whether the words in s 19 only apply in cases of temporary absence of a Minister. PRACTICE & PROCEDURE – retrospective legislation amendment – whether amendment deprived the issue raised by the notice of appeal of any real practical significance EVIDENCE – notice of motion to adduce further evidence not before primary judge – documentary evidence readily accessible to public and not contentious – whether failure to adduce evidence at trial due to a lack of reasonable diligence – whether evidence important to the proper determination of the application – whether new evidence required formal proof. ADMINISTRATIVE LAW – relevant considerations – whether Minister acted in accordance with the requirements of natural justice and procedural fairness – whether procedural fairness required a further opportunity for respondent to respond to factual matters in issue. Acts Interpretation Act 1901 (Cth), s 19 Acts Interpretation Act 1998 (Cth) Australian Constitution 1901 (Cth), s 64 Evidence Act 1995 (Cth), ss 143, 153, 155 Extradition Act 1988 (Cth), ss 22, 23 Judiciary Act 1903 (Cth), s 39B Law Officers Act 1964 (Cth), s 17 Acts Interpretation Amendment Bill 1998 Extradition (Commonwealth Countries) Regulations, r 7

Director of Public Prosecutions (Cth) v Kainhofer (1995) 185 CLR 528 cited Papzoglou v Republic of the Philippines (1997) 74 FCR 108 cited Buck v Bavone (1976) 135 CLR 110 cited Meggitt Overseas Limited v Grdovic (1998) 43 NSWLR 527 cited Beitseen v Johnson (1989) 29 IR 336 cited La Roche v Cormack (1991) 33 FCR 414 cited Mayne Nickless Limited v Transport Workers Union of Australia (unreported, Full Federal Court, 16 July 1998) cited Harris v Attorney-General (Cth) (1994) 52 FCR 386 cited The Queen v Gamble; The Queen v Moore (1983) 72 FLR 352 referred to GTE (Australia) Pty Ltd v Brown (1986) 76 ALR 221 discussed R v Judd (1919) 19 SR (NSW) 59 referred to Zoeller v Attorney-General for the Commonwealth (1987) 16 FCR 153 discussed The King v Judd (1919) 26 CLR 168 cited Florance v Andrew (1985) 58 ALR 377 cited Orr v Holmes (1948) 76 CLR 632 cited Council of the City of Greater Wollongong v Cowan (1955) 93 CLR 435 cited R v Secretary of State for the Home Department, ex parte Doody (1993) QB 157 applied O'Reilly v The Commissioners of the State Bank of Victoria (1983) 153 CLR 1 cited Re Reference under section 11 of Ombudsman Act 1976 for an advisory opinion (1979) 2 ALD 86 cited Carltona Ltd v Commissioners of Works [1943] 2 All ER 560 applied Forrest v Kelly (1992) 34 FCR 74 referred to Minister for Immigration and Ethnic Affairs v Pochi (1980) 31 ALR 666 cited Minister for Aboriginal Affairs v Peko Wallsend Limited (1986) 162 CLR 24 cited Waterford v The Commonwealth (1987) 163 CLR 54 cited THE HONOURABLE DARYL ROBERT WILLIAMS, AM, QC, MP, ATTORNEY-GENERAL OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF AUSTRALIA v PETER CLARENCE FOSTER QG 128 OF 1998 VON DOUSSA, O'LOUGHLIN & MANSFIELD JJ ADELAIDE (heard in Adelaide) 16 FEBRUARY 1999