Chandrasekaran, In the matter of an application for leave to issue or file

[2021] HCATrans 077

IN THE HIGH COURT OF AUSTRALIA

Office of the Registry
Sydney No S45 of 2021

In the matter of -
an application by SUJATHA CHANDRASEKARAN for leave to issue or file

GORDON J

TRANSCRIPT OF PROCEEDINGS

AT MELBOURNE ON TUESDAY, 27 APRIL 2021, AT 9.28 AM

HER HONOUR: Matter No S45/2021 is an ex parte application for leave to issue or file an application for an order under s 40 of the Judiciary Act 1903 (Cth) removing a part of a cause now pending in the Supreme Court of New South Wales, namely 2018/177874, into this Court. Pursuant to rr 6.07.2 and 13.03.1 of the High Court Rules 2004 (Cth), I direct that the application for leave to issue or file be determined without an oral hearing. The ex parte application for leave to issue or file is refused. I publish those reasons.

In matter No S45/2021, the order of the Court is: the ex parte application for leave to issue or file the application for an order under s 40 of the Judiciary Act 1903 (Cth) removing a part of a cause now pending in the Supreme Court of New South Wales, namely 2018/177874 commenced by the applicant Sujatha Chandrasekaran against Western Sydney Local Health District and Charterhouse Medical Pty Ltd, into this Court, is refused. I publish that order. I further direct that the reasons as published be incorporated into the transcript.

This is an ex parte application for leave to issue or file an application for an order under s 40 of the Judiciary Act 1903 (Cth) removing a part of a cause now pending in the Supreme Court of New South Wales, namely 2018/177874 commenced by the applicant, Sujatha Chandrasekaran against Western Sydney Local Health District and Charterhouse Medical Pty Ltd (“the 2018 NSW Supreme Court Proceeding”) into this Court. On 24 March 2021, Gageler J directed that, pursuant to r 6.07.2 of the High Court Rules 2004 (Cth), the application for removal was not to be issued or filed without the leave of a Justice first had and obtained by the applicant. This is an application for that leave.

I have read the applicant’s affidavit and all of the material annexed to it, which also effectively includes the applicant’s submissions. The applicant seeks to have removed into this Court a dismissed application to re‑open the trial of the 2018 NSW Supreme Court Proceeding to enable the applicant to adduce new evidence. That removal application does not identify any sufficient cause for the removal of part of the 2018 NSW Supreme Court Proceeding into this Court. Moreover, the decision of the trial judge in the 2018 NSW Supreme Court Proceeding is currently reserved.

Pursuant to rr 6.07.2 and 13.03.1 of the High Court Rules, I direct that the application for leave to issue or file be determined without an oral hearing. The ex parte application for leave to issue or file the application for an order under s 40 of the Judiciary Act removing a part of the 2018 NSW Supreme Court Proceeding into this Court is refused.

AT 9.30 AM THE MATTER WAS CONCLUDED

CaseChat Overview and Summary

This matter concerned an ex parte application by Sujatha Chandrasekaran to the High Court of Australia for leave to issue or file an application seeking an order under section 40 of the Judiciary Act 1903 (Cth). The purpose of the proposed application was to remove a part of a cause pending in the Supreme Court of New South Wales, specifically proceeding number 2018/177874, into the High Court. The Supreme Court proceeding involved the applicant and respondents Western Sydney Local Health District and Charterhouse Medical Pty Ltd.

The legal issue before the High Court was whether to grant leave for the applicant to issue or file an application for the removal of a part of the New South Wales Supreme Court proceeding. This required the Court to consider the merits of the proposed removal application, particularly whether it identified sufficient cause for such removal. The applicant sought to remove a dismissed application to re-open the trial of the Supreme Court proceeding to adduce new evidence, noting that the trial judge's decision in the original proceeding was still reserved.

The Court, applying rules 6.07.2 and 13.03.1 of the High Court Rules 2004 (Cth), determined that the application for leave should be decided without an oral hearing. After reviewing the applicant's affidavit and annexed material, the Court found that the removal application did not identify any sufficient cause for the removal of part of the Supreme Court proceeding into the High Court. Consequently, the ex parte application for leave to issue or file was refused.

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established