We are going to have a go at reporting on High Court transcripts. We begin on 22 September, 2005, in the case of Plaintiff M51/2005 v MIMIA & Anor, which concerned an application by the Plaintiff for judicial review of the decision of the Refugee Review Tribunal, made on 30 April 2004.

The Plaintiff appealed to the Federal Magistrates Court, then to the Federal Court and, as evidenced by these proceedings, to the High Court. The Plaintiff did not attend the Federal Court hearings, claiming he was sick with arthritis, and could not walk.

Essentially, his claim for mandamus was 10 months overdue. He claimed he had further documents in India, which required more time to obtain. He also wanted cert, prohibition and injunction against the RRT decision.

Hayne J found that the Plaintiff's claim should be dismissed, on the basis that there were no grounds for an extension of time. He held that once such extension was not granted, there could be no prohibition or injunction granted.

So, M51/2005 found himself, without a lawyer, with an ailment which seemed to stop him getting to Court, having his application for a time extension dismissed. His 'documents' in India will not be able to be taken into consideration by the RRT and the decision will stand. Further, the government sought costs, and when asked if he/she could give any reason why costs should not be ordered, M51 replied that he/she was unemployed and could not pay the costs.

Hayne J replied 'I understand that. Nonetheless, the order will be proceeding dismissed with costs.'

I am the first to admit that I have no idea about how costs are awarded. However, that seems a bit tough!