Nickel trial set to go ahead
LAWYERS trying to delay a mammoth trial over the collapse of Queensland Nickel have been warned they will need to make an extraordinary argument to have an upcoming 60-day trial cancelled.
The high-profile case, surrounding the 2016 collapse of wannabe politician Clive Palmer’s Queensland Nickel refinery, is set for a two-month trial in April next year but lawyers for the mining magnate and his companies have called for it to be delayed.
Yesterday’s hearing was the first in front of Justice David Jackson, who took over the case after Justice John Bond recused himself last month due to claims of apprehended bias brought by Mr Palmer and his co-defendants.
Justice Jackson turned away a lawyer who arrived in court to represent Mr Palmer, who is overseas, saying he hadn’t filed the proper paperwork to appear on his behalf.
“The rules of the court are not there to be manipulated by those who choose to observe them when it suits,” the judge said. “Mr Palmer can exercise his right to appear … but he does not under that guise get to choose when it suits him to come and when not to come.
“If he’s going to appear in that fashion he will appear in that fashion as is his right but he will not be granted indulgences on the basis he can just come by whenever it suits him and not have to do the same as every other person who appoints a lawyer.”
Lawyer Kris Byrne, who appeared on behalf of Mr Palmer’s companies, said he was seeking the trial date to be vacated because there was too much paperwork to sift through in the allotted time.
But Justice Jackson said the 60 days already set aside were a “very significant commitment of court resources” that had been allocated after “considerable” consideration by Justice Bond.
“When it comes to disclosure, cases on the commercial list will have to follow prompt steps for disclosure to be carried out including, if it is necessary, the allocation of extraordinary resources,” he said.
“It would be a significant decision and a significantly negative decision for the resources of the court to start fiddling around with trial dates that have been set so long in advance.”