Justices (Review) Rules 2004

Justices (Review) Rules 2004

2 December 2004

We, the Honourable WILLIAM JOHN ELLIS COX, Companion of the Order of Australia, Chief Justice, and the Honourable PETER GEORGE UNDERWOOD, Officer of the Order of Australia, the Honourable EWAN CHARLES CRAWFORD, the Honourable PIERRE WILLIAM SLICER, the Honourable PETER ETHRINGTON EVANS and the Honourable ALAN MICHAEL BLOW, holder of the Medal of the Order of Australia, Puisne Judges of the Supreme Court of Tasmania, make the following general rules under and for the purposes of Part XI of the Justices Act 1959.

These rules may be cited as the Justices (Review) Rules 2004.

These rules take effect on the day on which their making is notified in the Gazette.

In these rules –

Act means the Justices Act 1959;

correctional officer has the same meaning as in the Corrections Act 1997;

Registrar means the Registrar of the Supreme Court.

These rules apply to all proceedings in the Supreme Court under Part XI of the Act.

A legal practitioner is taken to be the legal practitioner on the record for a party if –

it appears from the notice to review, notice of appeal, case stated or application for a rule or order to show cause, by note endorsed or otherwise, that he or she is the party's legal practitioner; or he or she files a notice that he or she is acting for the party.

A notice to review is to be made returnable on a Wednesday in a sittings to be held at the place nearest to the court from which the appeal is brought.

The Registrar may, on receipt of a memorandum signed by both parties agreeing to a change in the place at which a notice to review is returnable, change the place to accord with the place specified in the memorandum.

On the application of a person who has filed or been served with a notice to review, a judge may – fix an earlier return day; or change the place at which the notice is returnable.

A judge may make an order under subrule (3) on such terms as to costs or otherwise as he or she thinks fit.

The parties to proceedings or their legal practitioners may apply jointly for the making of a consent order in those proceedings, other than an order agreeing to allow or uphold a motion to review.

An application for a consent order is to be – made by memorandum to the Registrar; and signed by the parties or their legal practitioners; and supported by affidavit, if required.

A judge in chambers may make an order on a memorandum without the attendance of the parties.

An applicant who does not prosecute a notice to review is not taken to have abandoned the notice to review until that applicant has – filed a notice of discontinuance with the Registrar; and served the notice of discontinuance on any other parties to the notice to review.

A notice of discontinuance is to be in accordance with the appropriate form prescribed in the Supreme Court Forms Rules 2000.

On the filing and service of a notice of discontinuance under subrule (1), the notice to review is taken to be dismissed with costs.

Rule 700 of the Supreme Court Rules 2000 applies if the Court, on the hearing of a notice to review, appeal or case stated –

reserves the motion or case, or a point arising therein or a point of law arising, in an appeal for the Full Court; or directs the motion or case or any such point to be argued in the Full Court.

Subject to section 123 of the Act, the provisions of Division 1 of Part 27 of the Supreme Court Rules 2000 apply to an appeal to the Full Court under that section.

In this Part –

any proceedings means any proceedings undertaken in the Supreme Court under Part XI of the Act.