Harrington-Smith on behalf of the Wongatha People v State of Western Australia [2002] FCA 632

Harrington-Smith on behalf of the Wongatha People v State of Western Australia [2002] FCA 632

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
17 May 2002
Procedural Posture
Federal Court Proceeding / Orders in Respect of the Hearing Period 17 June 2002 to 2 August 2002
Outcome
Orders made in respect of the hearing period 17 June 2002 to 2 August 2002; specified motions adjourned or dismissed with no order as to costs; liberty to apply granted.
Legal Topics
['recall of Witnesses for Cross Examination' 'hearing Locations' 'points of Claim' 'restricted Evidence' 'in Camera Evidence' 'disposal of Motions' 'liberty to Apply']
['civil Procedure' 'evidence'] ['recall of Witnesses for Cross Examination' 'hearing Locations' 'points of Claim' 'restricted Evidence' 'in Camera Evidence' 'disposal of Motions' 'liberty to Apply']

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 1 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 1 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Procedural Posture

Federal Court Proceeding / Orders in Respect of the Hearing Period 17 June 2002 to 2 August 2002

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether specified respondent groups should be entitled to further cross-examine identified witnesses.' 'Where evidence for the applicants, GLSC respondents, Maduwongga respondents and Cosmo Newberry respondents should be heard during the hearing period.' 'Whether Order 18 made on 2 April 2002 should be varied regarding points of claim.' "What restrictions should apply to evidence concerning women's Dreamtime Beings and stories at the Mingari site and men's stories and ceremonies at the Pilpirr/Minnie Creek site." 'How the notices of motion filed in May 2002 should be disposed of.']

Court Disposition

Orders made in respect of the hearing period 17 June 2002 to 2 August 2002; specified motions adjourned or dismissed with no order as to costs; liberty to apply granted.

Orders

  • ['The Group 6A respondents are entitled to cross-examine further Mervyn Sullivan, Kalman Murphy and Troy Chapman.' 'The Group 5A respondents are entitled to cross-examine further Aubrey Lynch and Leo Thomas.' 'The Group 5B respondents are entitled to cross-examine further Aubrey Lynch.' 'Orders 1, 2 and 3 are...