The High Court has refused a respondent’s request for audio recordings or transcripts of two earlier hearings in family law proceedings, ruling that the judicial review he said he intended to pursue could not lie against High Court orders.
Mr Justice Henry Abbott delivered the judgment on 24 July 2015. The respondent’s motion, issued on 15 June 2015, sought the digital audio recordings or transcripts of hearings held on 7 May 2014 before Ms Justice O’Hanlon and on 27 February 2015 before Mr Justice Abbott.
In an affidavit, the respondent said he urgently needed the material to prepare an application for judicial review of the decisions made at both hearings. The judgment records that the court had power under Order 123 of the Rules of the Superior Courts to permit access to all or part of a court record where it considered access necessary in the interests of justice. Unless the court directed otherwise, access would be by transcript and at the applicant’s expense.
Justice Abbott said the respondent’s stated purpose required the court to consider whether High Court decisions could be judicially reviewed. Relying on Supreme Court authorities and a 2013 High Court decision, he held that judicial review could not be brought against an order of the High Court. The judge noted that the motion itself did not seek leave to begin judicial review, but said the jurisdiction issue had to be addressed to assess whether access to the recordings was necessary in the interests of justice.
Because the respondent could not pursue the relief described in his affidavit, the judge found the access application was moot and could not succeed. After considering the available documents and the parties’ views, the court refused the relief and did not release the recordings or transcripts of either hearing.
The judgment concerns access to the records of those two hearings. It does not record a decision on any separate application for judicial review.