Application for a writ of mandamus against Hassell, Roland Patrick & Ors Ex Parte Pride, Honora Mary the Commonwealth of Australia [1984] FCA 245

Application for a writ of mandamus against Hassell, Roland Patrick & Ors Ex Parte Pride, Honora Mary the Commonwealth of Australia [1984] FCA 245

The Repatriation Review Tribunal, exercising investigative and not solely adversarial functions, has the power under s.107VY of the Repatriation Act 1920 to summon applicants (including Mrs. Pride) to appear and give evidence at the hearing; s.107VU(1) allows an applicant to make written submissions if they wish the review to proceed in their absence, but does not preclude the Tribunal from requiring their attendance to give evidence. There is no legislative distinction made in s.107VY excluding applicants from those who may be summoned. Mrs. Pride has not established entitlement to prohibition.

Parties
Prosecutor: Honora Mary Pride; Respondent: Roland Patrick Hassell; Respondent: Desmond Matthew Tehan; Respondent: Stanley McLeish Harris; Respondent: Repatriation Review Tribunal; Third Party: The Commonwealth of Australia
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
20 August 1984
Procedural Posture
Application for Writ of Prohibition / Judgment on Application for Writ of Prohibition
Outcome
Application for a writ of prohibition dismissed
Legal Topics
Repatriation Review Tribunal Procedures, Compellability of Applicants as Witnesses, Issuing of Witness Summons, Investigative Versus Adversarial Proceedings
Administrative Law Military and Veterans Law Repatriation Review Tribunal Procedures Compellability of Applicants as Witnesses Issuing of Witness Summons Investigative Versus Adversarial Proceedings

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 3 Authorities cited 10 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Honora Mary Pride

Prosecutor

Roland Patrick Hassell

Respondent

Desmond Matthew Tehan

Respondent

Stanley McLeish Harris

Respondent

Repatriation Review Tribunal

Respondent

The Commonwealth of Australia

Third Party

Procedural Posture

Application for Writ of Prohibition / Judgment on Application for Writ of Prohibition

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the issuing of a witness summons by the Repatriation Review Tribunal to an applicant is reviewable
  2. 2 Whether the Tribunal may require an applicant to attend to give evidence
  3. 3 Whether the applicant is a compellable witness under the Repatriation Act 1920

Ratio Decidendi

The Repatriation Review Tribunal, exercising investigative and not solely adversarial functions, has the power under s.107VY of the Repatriation Act 1920 to summon applicants (including Mrs. Pride) to appear and give evidence at the hearing; s.107VU(1) allows an applicant to make written submissions if they wish the review to proceed in their absence, but does not preclude the Tribunal from requiring their attendance to give evidence. There is no legislative distinction made in s.107VY excluding applicants from those who may be summoned. Mrs. Pride has not established entitlement to prohibition.

Court Disposition

Application for a writ of prohibition dismissed

Orders

  • The application for a writ of prohibition against Roland Patrick Hassell, Desmond Matthew Tehan and Stanley McLeish Harris is dismissed.