Attitude of the High Court
[go
to HAIG REPORT home frames]
Ruth Cheetham, [good name ("cheat 'em"), for a lawyer: better name
for a
bookie], Deputy Registrar, High Court of Australia, Canberra
Registry <rcheetham@hcourt.gov.au>
Ph: 02 6270 6860 Fx: 02 6273 3025
Justice Ian Callinan wants me to seek leave, to seek leave, to appeal: that's right;
you read it correctly, he wants me to seek leave to seek leave. This is NOT A JOKE.
This is putting an extra hurdle in my way to have the High Court
consider THE DOCUMENTED EVIDENCE that the Supreme Court of Queensland
[SCQ] is not prepared "to keep their house in order". Read the EVIDENCE
I have published on this site. My grounds of appeal, as
you can see below is basically, THAT THE SUPREME COURT OF
QUEENSLAND [SCQ] IS CORRUPT.
Maybe we should look more closely at Ian Callinan J.
The Queensland Court of Appeal dismissed my appeal when I appealed the
decision of the Supreme Court of Queensland [SCQ] to dismiss my
application without hearing it. Under our Australian constitution
and later legislation, I have right to seek leave of the High Court to
hear my appeal of the decision of the Court of Appeal. I
lodged such an application to seek leave of the High Court to appeal
the decision of the Court of Appeal division of the SCQ. Importantly, my
grounds were basically, that the SCQ was corrupt. Of course, if a
court is corrupt, then all decisions of that court would have to be
worthless.
Under our Constitution, the High Court of
Australia [HCA], as the superior court of the supreme courts of
all the states and territories of Australia, has
responsibility to ensure that all of those courts are operating
properly.
So, if anyone raised the spectre of the SCQ being corrupt, I
believe it is poor form and in fact highly improper for the HCA to try
to silence such a stance, but that is precisely what they have
done. They have tried to place barriers in the path. Does
that give you greater or lesser confidence in the High Court of
Australia?
[Rule 6.07 of the High Court Rules 2004, reads:
6.07 Refusal to issue or file a document
If any writ, application, summons or other document appears to a Registrar on its face to be an abuse of the process of the
Court or to be frivolous or vexatious, the Registrar may seek the direction of a Justice who may direct the Registrar to issue or file it or to refuse to issue or file it without the leave of a Justice first had and obtained by the party seeking to issue or file it.]
Firstly, see what the Deputy Registrar of the HCA had to say.
Well that is clearly what she wants. Did you note her email
address? It is given again at the head of this page, in case
anyone wishes to write to her expressing a view once they have read
this whole page, and the pages hyperlinked to it.
She says, in her email dated 7 June, 2006, "has been referred"; past
tense. It would have been in Canberra on 29 May, 2006. The
date of this email is already 9 days after arrival in Canberra, of my
application.
Callinan J made this decision of 3 August, 2006. My
application arrived in Canberra on 29 May, 2006. That was over
NINE WEEKS to make that decision. It was ONLY ONE PAGE as can be
seen below. Ruth Cheetham said on the 7 June that it had already
been given
[referred] to "a Justice of the High Court". It took over EIGHT
WEEKS
from that date. So, what was happening. There are
SEVEN JUDGES of
the HCA. How many other judges of the other SIX JUDGES of the HCA
had
refused to make the order that Cheetham wanted? If all other six
judges had had it referred to them but refused, that would have
been
an average of more than ten days per judge. That would be
quite realistic. So, how many other judges refused to make the
order desired by Cheetham.
Maybe we should consider a little
more about Callinan J.
So Callinan J has
found that, on the face of it, that my seeking leave
to appeal is an abuse of the process of the Court or is frivolous or
is vexatious. I suggest
that Callinan J. is taking a very big risk that the
SCQ is actually corrupt, but that may never be discovered. If
this
is a
suggestion that the HCA is itself corrupt, there will be no point in my
wasting my time in overcoming this extra hurdle placed in the my way.
We know the saying: "There is no-one so blind as he who will not
see [or open their eyes, even]."