Dunstan v Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Commission [2004] FCA 1137

FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

Dunstan v Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Commission [2004] FCA 1137

PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – subpoenas – leave to issue – whether subpoenas seek production of documents of potential relevance – criteria for grant of leave – utility to requesting party – leave refused.

Federal Court Rules, O 27A r 2

Waind v Hill [1978] 1 NSWLR 372 cited Commissioner for Railways v Small (1938) SR (NSW) 564 cited Australian Gas Light Company v Australian Competition and Consumer Commission [2003] FCA 1101 cited Hudson Timber & Hardware Ltd v Chaudhary Group Pty Ltd [2002] FCA 832 cited COLIN GEORGE DUNSTAN v HUMAN RIGHTS AND EQUAL OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION, HENRY PRICE, DONALD BARTLEY, JOHN GROWDER, GEOFFREY SEYMOUR AND COMMONWEALTH OF AUSTRALIA ACD 30 of 1997 LANDER J 2 SEPTEMBER 2004 ADELAIDE

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

AUSTRALIAN CAPITAL TERRITORY DISTRICT REGISTRY ACD 30 OF 1997

BETWEEN: COLIN GEORGE DUNSTAN

APPLICANT

AND: HUMAN RIGHTS AND EQUAL OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION

FIRST RESPONDENT

HENRY PRICE

SECOND RESPONDENT

DONALD BARTLEY

THIRD RESPONDENT

JOHN GROWDER

FOURTH RESPONDENT

GEOFFREY SEYMOUR

FIFTH RESPONDENT

COMMONWEALTH OF AUSTRALIA

SIXTH RESPONDENT

JUDGE: LANDER J

DATE OF ORDER: 2 SEPTEMBER 2004

WHERE MADE: ADELAIDE

THE COURT ORDERS THAT: 1. The application for leave to issue the subpoenas is refused. Note: Settlement and entry of orders is dealt with in Order 36 of the Federal Court Rules.

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

AUSTRALIAN CAPITAL TERRITORY DISTRICT REGISTRY ACD 30 OF 1997

BETWEEN: COLIN GEORGE DUNSTAN

APPLICANT

AND: HUMAN RIGHTS AND EQUAL OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION