HANRAHAN v AINSWORTH SUPREME COURT OF NEW SOUTH WALES COURT OF APPEAL MAHONEY JA 24 June 1991, 24 June 1991 [1991] NSWCA 141 Mahoney JA This is an application by Mr Hanrahan seeking the listing at an appropriate time of proceedings which have been brought against him by Mr Ainsworth. The proceedings brought by Mr Ainsworth are for a declaration that Mr Hanrahan was guilty of contempt (I summarise the first paragraph of the summons in the contempt proceedings) in that he did, in breach of an undertaking before the court and for purposes which were improper and collateral to the proceedings, furnish to a third party a sealed copy of verified answers to interrogatories there referred to. Originally Mr Hanrahan asked that those proceedings stand over. The reason why he asked that they stand over was or at least included that there are civil proceedings pending between the parties and that, as I have described it in discussion of the matter, what took place in the contempt proceedings would overlap with the civil proceedings or vice versa. Application is now made by Mr Hanrahan to alter that decision and to obtain an order that the contempt proceedings be now listed and not await the determination of the civil proceedings. Reference is made in the affidavit of his solicitor Mr Ironside to the pending civil proceedings. The parties are agreed that one aspect of the civil proceedings will be listed for call over in October 1991 and that it is anticipated that the hearing date to be given will be "sometime in 1992". Another aspect of the proceeding is apt to come on much later than that. Mr Ainsworth neither consents to nor opposes the application that the contempt proceeding be now brought on for hearing. Mr Evatt's client, Mr Hanrahan, is content for the contempt proceedings to continue, notwithstanding that in the contempt proceedings, a criminal proceeding, something may occur which will affect his position in relation to the civil proceedings or otherwise he may be prejudiced. In these circumstances, which are somewhat special, I think it is appropriate that an order be made that the contempt proceedings come on for hearing at an appropriate time. I do not think that it is appropriate that they be given immediate hearing or that they be dealt with with the utmost expedition. But I think it is appropriate that a date for hearing be fixed for them, notwithstanding the pendency of the civil proceedings. I have been informed by the parties that so far as Mr Ainsworth, the moving party in the contempt proceedings, is concerned, all of the evidence proposed to be adduced for the contempt proceedings has already been filed. I am informed that Mr Hanrahan takes the position which he is entitled to take, namely that, the contempt proceedings being criminal, he need not at this point make a final decision as to the evidence to be called. He does not desire to put on further evidence at this stage. 2 UNREPORTED JUDGMENTS In the circumstances, I think the contempt proceeding is in an appropriate condition for it to be put into a list for the fixing of a date for hearing. The order that I make, therefore, is that the contempt proceeding No 304 of 5 1988 be referred to the Registrar of the Court of Appeal to fix an appropriate date for hearing in due course. The costs of the application are to be paid by Mr Hanrahan.