FRUGTNIET v ATTORNEY GENERAL'S DEPARTMENT SUPREME COURT OF NEW SOUTH WALES — COURT OF APPEAL PRIESTLEY JA 12 August 1996 [1996] NSWCA 202 Priestley JA. In the matter of Frugtniet and the Attorney General, which is the name of one matter, and the other matter of Frugtniet and the Legal Aid Commission, a judgment was delivered by Justice Simpson on Thursday last having the effect that Mr Frugtniet is now subject to an order under the Removal of Prisoners Interstate Transfer Act that he be taken to Victoria in connection with criminal proceedings which have been on foot there and will soon again be on foot. Justice Simpson granted a stay of her order until sometime today. Mr Frugtniet caused an application for leave to appeal against her judgment to be filed which is returnable next Monday 19 August. He has also filed a notice of motion seeking a stay of Justice Simpson's orders until the hearing of the application for leave. That application for stay was presented today by his wife, somewhat irregularly so far as the rules are concerned. She informs methat he wishes to be present on Monday next so that he can present his application for leave to appeal. The application today for the stay until the leave application is determined was opposed on behalf of the Attorney General who is concerned about delay to the proceedings in Victoria. If the application for leave to appeal is refused, then any delay that will have been caused by the pendency of that application will, according to submissions I have heard on behalf of the Attorney General, cause further time to be lost in the resumption and completion of the proceedings in Victoria. I have indicated that the various aspects of the matter lead me to think that on balance it is better to grant a stay of Justice Simpson's order until 4.15pm next Monday, 19 August 1996. In all probability the application for leave should be able to be heard on that day. Counsel for the Attorney General has indicated that his client will co-operate in seeing that the administrative machinery necessary to have Mr Frugtniet here next Monday from Goulburn where he is presently in custody will be set in motion. I have not formally granted leave to Mrs Frugtniet to appear today and I will not take that step. Subject of course to whatever the Court next Monday may decide, I think Mrs Frugtniet you should anticipate next Monday that it is unlikely you would be permitted to appear again on behalf of your husbandand he will either have to present his own case or have a legal representative. I will reserve the costs of today's application. Orders accordingly.