Dear Federal Court of Australia,

An order was made by Justice Yates on 19 September 2019 to remove five filed Affidavits from the Court File by the Interested Person dated 1 May 19, 1 August 19, 5 August 19, 21 August 19 and 26 August 19.

This occurred after a classic example of "disparaging the whistleblower" by James Frost from the Australian Financial Review using false information provided by ASIC

The Affidavit affirmed on 1 May 2019 confirmed that ASIC had failed to honour an undertaking given before the Honourable Justice Kenny in VID 323 of 2011 and also confirmed that ASIC was in contempt of the Federal Court.

This would mean that proceedings NSD 1654/2018 were an abuse of process and should be stayed until such time as ASIC honoured the undertaking given to Honourable Justice Kenny

However, no order was made by Justice Yates with respect to an Affidavit affirmed on 16 September 2019 that included Exhibits PCS52 and PCS53 which were copies of defamatory and intimidating publications by James Frost from the Australian Financial Review on 31 July 2019.

The main publication was titled "Serial pest hijacks ASIC's case against NAB over fees scandal".

A post on Twitter by James Frost @jamesafrost on 31 July 2019 stated:

"ICYMI Serial pest who bombarded ASIC with hundreds of requests signed Pussy Galore and Goldfinger hijacks landmark fees-for-bo service case against NAB @asicmedia".

This was completely "fake news" provided by ASIC to Mr Frost.

{Evidence of this "fake news" will be provided to the Federal Court}

The AFR article also contained false information that Mr Frost could only have obtained from ASIC, the Applicant in proceedings NSD 1654/2018 before Justice Yates.

No order was made with respect to an Interlocutory Application and Statement of Charge dated 16 September that related to this Contempt in the face of the Court.

That is the second Contempt of Court in addition to ASIC's Contempt of Court as described above.

However, these documents were returned to the Interested Person the next day!!!

The Interested Person then returned these documents related to the Contempt in the face of the Court to the District Registrar by Registered Post RPP 44 63900 05100 09928 98607 on 25 September 2019.

However, Australia Post has confirmed that the District Registrar never received these documents {Which is somewhat unusual!}.

Therefore the Affidavit containing evidence of the Contempt in the face of the Court was reaffirmed on the 7 October 2019 and the interlocutory Application and Statement of Charge sent by Express Mail to the District Registrar.

Hopefully, this evidence of a Contempt in the face of the Court by James Frost from the Australian Financial Review has at last been received by the District Registrar.

The document I seek is a copy of the covering letter dated 7 October 2019 titled "RE: Interlocutory Application Wrongly Returned {2nd Attempt to Return Interlocutory Application}"

This will confirm that Justice Yates is again privy to the publications by James Frost that are clearly a case of Contempt in the face of the Court by publication.

This is now a matter of public interest.

Yours faithfully,

Phillip Sweeney

Dear Federal Court of Australia,

Please pass this on to the person who conducts Freedom of Information reviews.

I am writing to request an internal review of Federal Court of Australia's handling of my FOI request 'Confirmation that the Federal Court has evidence of a Contempt of Court'.

The hallmark of office "administration" is the management of documents whether paper documents or electronic documents such as email records.

Documents after a certain time are often archived so that they can be recovered at a later date. This is especially important for documents of a legal nature.

It is a serious matter when a journalist commits a contempt in the face of the Court by failing to report proceedings current afoot in an accurate and fair manner - to describe a party to a proceedings as a "Serial Pest" is clearly a contempt, especially when that party has been an Applicant who has obtained an undertaking from the Federal Court that is relevant to the current proceedings.

An interlocutory application and an associated affidavit containing copies of the published articles have been returned to the victim THREE times by junior clerks when no Order has been made by Justice Yeates with respect to this contempt of court by James Frost.

Clearly these junior clerks have been following instructions from someone higher in the chain of command at the Federal Court.

There must be an email chain or a paper memorandum instructing these junior clerks to "get rid" of evidence of this contempt of court by returning the evidence to the victim and hoping that the victim "just goes away" so that the administration of justice is not brought into disrepute by turning a blind eye to such a blatant contempt in the face of the court.

This conduct with respect to document administration may need to be appealed to the Administrative Appeals Tribunal and so I am seeking an Internal Review so that such an appeal might be avoided.

A full history of my FOI request and all correspondence is available on the Internet at this address: https://www.righttoknow.org.au/request/c...

Yours faithfully,

Phillip Sweeney