FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA Croker v Deputy Registrar of the High Court [2002] FCA 1260 PRACTICE & PROCEDURE – whether leave to appeal should be granted. CLAYTON ROBERT CROKER v DEPUTY REGISTRAR OF THE HIGH COURT OF AUSTRALIA and GEORGE CHALLONER N 1402 of 2001 BEAUMONT J 4 OCTOBER 2002 SYDNEY IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA NEW SOUTH WALES DISTRICT REGISTRY N1402 OF 2001 BETWEEN: CLAYTON ROBERT CROKER APPLICANT AND: DEPUTY REGISTRAR OF THE HIGH COURT OF AUSTRALIA FIRST RESPONDENT GEORGE CHALLONER SECOND RESPONDENT JUDGE: BEAUMONT J DATE OF ORDER: 4 OCTOBER 2002 WHERE MADE: SYDNEY THE COURT ORDERS THAT: 1. The application for leave to appeal be dismissed. 2. The operation of order 1 be suspended up to and including 31 October 2002. 3. Liberty be reserved to the applicant to apply on or before 31 October 2002 to vary or discharge order 1. Note: Settlement and entry of orders is dealt with in Order 36 of the Federal Court Rules. IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA NEW SOUTH WALES DISTRICT REGISTRY N1402 OF 2001 BETWEEN: CLAYTON ROBERT CROKER APPLICANT AND: DEPUTY REGISTRAR OF THE HIGH COURT OF AUSTRALIA FIRST RESPONDENT GEORGE CHALLONER SECOND RESPONDENT JUDGE: BEAUMONT DATE: 4 OCTOBER 2002 PLACE: SYDNEY REASONS FOR JUDGMENT (ON APPLICATION FOR LEAVE TO APPEAL) BEAUMONT J: 1 This is an application for leave to appeal, which was before me on 10 September 2002, when, for the reasons I then gave, I stood the matter over until today. As I said in par 3 of those reasons, in my opinion, Mr Croker's point was premature at that stage, since I was not satisfied that he could show a real need to photocopy any material. However, as I went on to say, I proposed to give Mr Croker an opportunity to demonstrate this to the satisfaction of the docket Judge. By written submission filed on 30 September 2002, the applicant has made the following submission: "On the tenth of September in the year two thousand and two the applicant demonstrated to the docket Judge that the documents would be annexed to the final affidavit of evidence and furnished annotations would be commentary to the documents. The docket Judge stated that the requested documents would be better prepared in the way of a bundle of documents complimenting [sic] the affidavit and requested that all documents be marked with numbers stickers in the registry. The request in the application was as follows:- '(3) An Order that compliance with Federal Court of Australia Regulations 1978 (Cth) Reg 2 in regard to photocopying fees be adhered to;" This request was based on several statutory standings and common law in allowing a litigant to copy documents at no charge that are held in the registry of the Federal court of Australia and to prepare his case in accordance with statutory and other legal requirements. As to date no direct answer has been given to the request for compliance and no direct answer to the request for leave to appeal has been forwarded. It is alleged gross infractions of the applicants rights has to date been installed on the applicant and further gross infractions of the applicants rights seem to be pending it is requested that the first application be ruled on it merits and that the judgment of the docket judge by attended by sufficient doubt to warrant it being reconsidered by the Full Court and the substantial injustice that the docket judge has installed on the applicant be set aside. As to the requested adjournment medical evidence has been forwarded to Deputy District Registrar stating time constraints caused by the pending medical procedure. If further consideration could be attended to the application for an adjournment and the matter stood over to after the twentieth day of October personal appearance and a more substantial argument would be filed." 2 There has been correspondence between Mr Croker and the Acting District Registrar in which Mr Croker has requested that the proceeding today be adjourned for medical reasons. It was suggested to Mr Croker that a medical certificate be provided to the Court, and there is now with the papers a medical certificate from the Sydney Hospital certifying that Mr Croker attended the hospital on 2 October 2002 and would be unfit for work from 2 October to 20 October 2002 inclusive, due to "Rhinoplasty". The certificate is dated 25 September 2002. 3 I am still not satisfied that Mr Croker has demonstrated to the Court any need to pursue his proposed appeal. However, given his medical condition, I will not proceed to dispose of the matter finally. The appropriate order that I will make, in all the circumstances, is as follows: 1. Application for leave to appeal dismissed. 2. Suspend the operation of order 1 up to and including 31 October 2002. 3. Reserve liberty to the applicant to apply on or before 31 October to vary or discharge order 1. I certify that the preceding three (3) numbered paragraphs are a true copy of the Reasons for Judgment herein of the Honourable Justice Beaumont. Associate: Dated: 15 October 2002 Solicitor for the Applicant: No appearance Solicitor for the Respondent: No appearance Date of Hearing: 4 October 2002 Date of Judgment: 4 October 2002