Lee v Commonwealth of Australia

HIGH COURT OF AUSTRALIAFRENCH CJDANIEL THOMAS LEE & ANOR  PLAINTIFFSANDCOMMONWEALTH OF AUSTRALIA & ANOR  DEFENDANTSLee v Commonwealth of Australia[2012] HCA 6229 November 2012C5/2012ORDER1.The proceeding be remitted to the Federal Court at the Melbourne Registry.2.The proceeding continue in that Court as if the steps already taken in the proceeding in this Court have been taken in that Court.3.The Registrar of this Court forward to the proper officer of that Court photocopies of all documents filed in this Court.4.The costs of the summons be costs in the proceeding.5.The costs of the proceeding to the date of remission, including the costs of this order, are to be according to the scale applicable to proceedings in this Court and thereafter according to the scale applicable to that Court and in the discretion of that Court.RepresentationP E King for the plaintiffs (instructed by Maloney Anderson Legal)C L Lenehan with D M Forrester for the defendants (instructed by Australian Government Solicitor)Notice:  This copy of the Court's Reasons for Judgment is subject to formal revision prior to publication in the Commonwealth Law Reports.CATCHWORDSLee v Commonwealth of AustraliaPractice − High Court − Case stated − Questions reserved − Judiciary Act 1903 (Cth), s 18.Practice − High Court − Remitter − Judiciary Act 1903 (Cth), s 44.Constitution, ss 92, 99, 100.Judiciary Act 1903 (Cth), ss 18, 44.Water Act 2007 (Cth).FRENCH CJ.   By proceedings commenced by writ of summons on 13 September 2012, the plaintiffs, as representatives of a group of water users said to have the same interests, seek...