REASONS FOR JUDGMENT
Revised from transcript
YATES J:
INTRODUCTION
1 On 14 October 2024, I gave judgment on three questions: McGinn v Australian Information Commissioner [2024] FCA 1185 (Reasons 1).
2 In Reasons 1, I noted that, after the reasons had been prepared, and after the parties had been informed that judgment would be given on those questions on 14 October 2024, the applicant filed two interlocutory applications.
3 The first filed interlocutory application, dated 10 October 2024, seeks the following order:
An order to stay these proceedings until the Applicant's appeal at High Court for constitutional writs is determined.
4 The second filed interlocutory application, dated 11 October 2024, seeks the following order:
An order to disqualify Justice Yates from presiding these proceedings and future proceedings the Applicant is a party.
5 When these interlocutory applications were called on for hearing, the applicant did not appear.
6 Yesterday, Sunday 13 October 2024 at 6.00 pm, the applicant sent an email to the Court, addressed to me, which (omitting formal parts) said:
I noticed that my recusal application is listed as the last item of the hearing on 14/10/2024. Which should be determined before any judgment.
Please advise whether you will consider the recusal application first.
If yes, I will attend the hearing.
If no, I will not attend and I will apply setting aside the judgments per rule 39.05(a).
(Original in italics.)
7 This email came to my attention at approximately 8.45 am today, 14 October 2024. At that time, I directed the Registry to inform the applicant, by email, that judgment in respect of the outstanding questions would be delivered before dealing with the other matters before the Court in this proceeding.
