20140414-g. h. schorel-hlavka o.w.b. to mr b. o'farrell, premier and mr tony abbott pm- re norrie...
TRANSCRIPT
-
8/12/2019 20140414-G. H. Schorel-Hlavka O.W.B. to Mr B. O'Farrell, Premier and Mr Tony Abbott PM- Re Norrie HCA-s42A an
1/16
p1 14-4-2014
INSPECTOR-RIKATI about the BLACK HOLE in the CONSTITUTION-DVD
A 1stedition limited special numbered book on Data DVDISBN 978-0-9803712-6-0
PLEASE NOTE: You may order books in the INSPECTOR-RIKATI seriesby making a reservation, See also
Http://www.schorel-hlavka.com Blog atHttp://www.scrib.com/InspectorRikati
WITHOUT PREJUDICE
The Hon Barry O'Farrell, MP 14-4-2014
PremierMinister for Western Sydney5GPO Box 5341SYDNEY NSW 2001
http://www.premier.nsw.gov.au/contact-premier-new-south-wales
Cc: Mr Tony Abbott MP10
[email protected],[email protected]. H. Schorel-Hlavka O.W.B. to Mr B. O'Farrell, Premier and Mr Tony Abbott PM- Re Norrie HCA-s42A and non-
specific genderetc
15
Mr OFarrell,
I have not available to me and so neither read all relevant documents of the Norrie
case but I am concerned that the High Court of Australia erred in law in regard of ruling that the
Registrar must register a non-genderperson.
As I understand it from the reason of judgment20http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/cases/cth/HCA/2014/11.htmlQUOTE
10. A sex affirmation procedure is defined in s 32A as:
"a surgical procedure involving the alteration of a person's reproductive organs carried out:
(a) for the purpose of assisting a person to be considered to be a member of the opposite sex, or25(b) to correct or eliminate ambiguities relating to the sex of the person."
11. Norrie considered that the surgery did not resolve hersexual ambiguity. Sheapplied on 26November 2009 for hersex to be registered under the Act as "non-specific".
12. Section 32DB of the Act requires that an application under s 32DA be accompanied by:30
"statutory declarations by 2 doctors, or by 2 medical practitioners ... verifying that the person the subject
of the application has undergone a sex affirmation procedure".
END QUOTE
http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/american_english/sex?q=sex35QUOTE
1.1 [in singular] euphemistic A persons genitals.
2Either of the two main categories (male and female) into which humans and many other living things aredivided on the basis of their reproductive functions: adults of both sexes
More example sentences40o While there are only two sexes - male and female - there can be an unlimited number of genders.
END QUOTE
http://www.schorel-hlavka.com/http://www.schorel-hlavka.com/http://www.scrib.com/InspectorRikatihttp://www.scrib.com/InspectorRikatihttp://www.scrib.com/InspectorRikatimailto:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]://www.austlii.edu.au/au/cases/cth/HCA/2014/11.htmlhttp://www.austlii.edu.au/au/cases/cth/HCA/2014/11.htmlhttp://www.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/american_english/sex?q=sexhttp://www.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/american_english/sex?q=sexhttp://www.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/american_english/sex?q=sexhttp://www.austlii.edu.au/au/cases/cth/HCA/2014/11.htmlmailto:[email protected]:[email protected]://www.scrib.com/InspectorRikatihttp://www.schorel-hlavka.com/ -
8/12/2019 20140414-G. H. Schorel-Hlavka O.W.B. to Mr B. O'Farrell, Premier and Mr Tony Abbott PM- Re Norrie HCA-s42A an
2/16
p2 14-4-2014
INSPECTOR-RIKATI about the BLACK HOLE in the CONSTITUTION-DVD
A 1stedition limited special numbered book on Data DVDISBN 978-0-9803712-6-0
PLEASE NOTE: You may order books in the INSPECTOR-RIKATI seriesby making a reservation, See also
Http://www.schorel-hlavka.com Blog atHttp://www.scrib.com/InspectorRikati
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Organ_(anatomy)
QUOTE
Organ systems[edit]
Main article: Biological system
Two or more organs working together in the execution of a specific body function form an organ system, also5called a biological system or body system. The functions of organ systems often share significant overlap.
For instance, the nervous and endocrine system both operate via a shared organ, the hypothalamus. For this
reason, the two systems are combined and studied as the neuroendocrine system. The same is true for the
musculoskeletal system because of the relationship between the muscular and skeletal systems.
Mammals such as humans have a variety of organ systems. These specific systems are also widely studied in10 human anatomy.END QUOTE
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Organ_(anatomy)
QUOTE15 Reproductive system: the sex organs, such as ovaries, fallopian tubes, uterus, vagina, mammary glands,
testes, vas deferens, seminal vesicles, prostate and penis.
END QUOTE
As the legislation refers to sex Affirmation procedure and not to gender Affirmation20
procedurethen the issue is if there can be deemed to exist more than one sexbesides male
and femalein a biological manner.
In my view s32A doesnt provide for any consideration as to if the subject matter (the person
undergoing the sex Affirmation procedure mentally may or may not accept the change of25
sexuality as it is clearly limited to the a surgical procedure involving the alteration of a person's
reproductive organs carried out. And the brain is not indicated to be part of the reproduction
systemas an organ.
The question that arises, in my view, is if the sex affirmation procedurecan at all be used upon30
a perceived sex change from male to female or visa versa if the basic organs do not exist neither
can be created in the subject matters body. For example if a male is subjected to this sex
Affirmation procedure to become a female but cannot be provided with say ovaries then Iview the sex affirmation procedure from onset cannot succeed in a sex change from male to
female. Likewise, visa versa from a female to a male if in the end the testicles to assist in35
creating sperm doesnt exist and neither can be created as such then the sex affirmation
procedure cannot succeed. If therefore the Court relies upon s32A I view it erred to pursue
something within s32A that was not provided for.
While the court referred to intermediate and other terms in my view s32A is limited to the actual
sex change having been completed and not any partly progress in a change of sex.40
It appears to me that the High Court of Australia involved itself in seeking to social engineer via
its judgment to provide for backdoor legislation outside its permitted scope of judicial power of
adjudicating.45
It appears to me that s32A narrowly limits the sex affirmation procedureto a biological change
from male to female or from female to male and is not concerned about the mental
perceptions or mental status of the person who undergoes the sex affirmation procedure. And
unless the sex affirmation procedure actually can affirmthe so to say newly acquired sex I
view s32A cannot be invoked for registration.50
The issue is not if a person may or may not mentally accept a successful sex affirmation
procedurehaving eventuated but if in fact this occurred in physical manner. If it failed then I
view the person must be deemed not to have changed from maleto femaleor from female
to maleand the original registration of sexcannot be changed.
http://www.schorel-hlavka.com/http://www.schorel-hlavka.com/http://www.scrib.com/InspectorRikatihttp://www.scrib.com/InspectorRikatihttp://www.scrib.com/InspectorRikatihttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Organ_(anatomy)http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Organ_(anatomy)http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Organ_(anatomy)http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Organ_(anatomy)http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Organ_(anatomy)http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Organ_(anatomy)http://www.scrib.com/InspectorRikatihttp://www.schorel-hlavka.com/ -
8/12/2019 20140414-G. H. Schorel-Hlavka O.W.B. to Mr B. O'Farrell, Premier and Mr Tony Abbott PM- Re Norrie HCA-s42A an
3/16
p3 14-4-2014
INSPECTOR-RIKATI about the BLACK HOLE in the CONSTITUTION-DVD
A 1stedition limited special numbered book on Data DVDISBN 978-0-9803712-6-0
PLEASE NOTE: You may order books in the INSPECTOR-RIKATI seriesby making a reservation, See also
Http://www.schorel-hlavka.com Blog atHttp://www.scrib.com/InspectorRikati
It therefore is critical for the subject undergoing a sex affirmation procedure to have a
reasonable expectation that the person has or can end up after the sex affirmation procedure
with all sex organs that ordinary is deemed to establish a person to be of a certain sex. If for
example the medical provision seeking to invoke a sex affirmation procedure is aware that a
maleseeking to become a femalehas no ovaries and cannot be provided with ovariesthen a5
critical organ needed to become a femalecan never become a reality and as such for purpose
of s32A I view no change of sex could be permitted for registration.
Ordinary those in the law enforcement may ordinary hold that the physical presence of certain
genitals determines if they are dealing with a male or a female and it would be absurd for the10
police having to inquire in a persons mental perceptions as to understand if a person is or is not
a male, female or non-specific gender or sex. What will be the status of charges against any
person if the person can claim not to be of the sex that the genitals indicate? Also while I
understand that the N.S.W.; act doesnt allow for a married person to engage in a sex
affirmation procedureit now may be that a married person merely has to have the mental status15
of considering to be a non specificsex or to be a femaleor maleand we can end up that
this sidestep the limitations of the legislation where the actual surgical procedureis side stepped,
and the Registrar can be forced to change a Registration of a person merely on the say so of what
the person at the time may or may not mentally prescribe to as being of a sex or being non-specific.20
In my view the medical profession involved in sex affirmation procedure may now
(considering the Norriedecision) leave itself open to be sued for failing to accomplish the sex
change if it fails to provide a person who was registered as a male with ovaries to become a
female or a female to become a male with reproductive organs to become a male.25
As I understand it Mason CJ was reported to have made known that he held that where the court
deemed the legislators had failed to provide for certain provisions then the court would provide
for it in its judgment. In my view this is what appears to have been done in the Norriecase again.
This, even so it is offending the separation of powers between the judiciary and the legislators.30Indeed, it is not the function of the judiciary to interfere with the legislative powers of the
Parliament as much as the parliament is not to interfere with the judicial powers of the judiciary
(consider Kable).
In my view, the legislation intended that where a person was wrongly assigned a certain sex35
status being it maleor female then the legislation would provide for the correction of this
status where a sex affirmation procedurehad provided for the surgical procedureto successfully
conclude the change of sex. In my view this doesnt include the mental status of a person as it is
up to the medical profession engaged in the sex affirmation procedureto establish beforehand
before engaging in the surgical procedurethat the mental state, etc, is certified to be accepting this40
sex affirmation procedureintend.It would be beyond the capability or competence of a registrar to inquire into the mental status of
a person seeking to amend a change of sex status. No one can expect a registrar to act as some
member of the medical profession as to evaluate what the person seeking the change of sex status
may or may not mentally prescribed to. In my view the High Court of Australia placed an45
unreasonable burden upon the Registrar as now anyone who can come up with some
documentation of members of the medical profession providing that the person has the mental
status of being a non-specific sex or being a :male instead of a femaleor a female instead of a
maleirrespective of what the sex organs in that person might be, then would force the registrar
to alter the sex status, even so as it appears from the court judgment the filing of the medical50
statements itself is not an issue for the registrar to consider.
http://www.schorel-hlavka.com/http://www.schorel-hlavka.com/http://www.scrib.com/InspectorRikatihttp://www.scrib.com/InspectorRikatihttp://www.scrib.com/InspectorRikatihttp://www.scrib.com/InspectorRikatihttp://www.schorel-hlavka.com/ -
8/12/2019 20140414-G. H. Schorel-Hlavka O.W.B. to Mr B. O'Farrell, Premier and Mr Tony Abbott PM- Re Norrie HCA-s42A an
4/16
p4 14-4-2014
INSPECTOR-RIKATI about the BLACK HOLE in the CONSTITUTION-DVD
A 1stedition limited special numbered book on Data DVDISBN 978-0-9803712-6-0
PLEASE NOTE: You may order books in the INSPECTOR-RIKATI seriesby making a reservation, See also
Http://www.schorel-hlavka.com Blog atHttp://www.scrib.com/InspectorRikati
As such, a person charged as a male loitering in or near a female changing room, etc, merely then
has to go to the Registrar that same day and request a change of sex status and can then
undermine the charges laid as while having male reproductive organs being registered as a
:female, etc.
And, even this may not avoid undermining the charges as effectively it appears that not the5
Registrar changing the sex status determines the persons sex status but rather what the person
beforehand prescribes to.
In my view the intent of the legislation has been grossly abused and hijacked by the court, as it
appears to me the real intent was that where a person was wrongly provided with say a penis but
was found to have ovaries then a sex affirmation procedureusing a surgical procedurecould10
then have the physical conditions corrected to correspond. Likewise, if a person recorded as a
female was found to have testicles but was provided with a vagina at birth then again the
surgical procedure could correct this to affirm the biological status. As such the wording
affirmativewas meaning to affirmthe real biological status of the person at birth but not as
such known at the time of registration but now corrected and so affirmed.15
In my view the legislation may need to be amended to specifically exclude any mental
perceptions as to dictate if the sex affirmation procedure was or was not successful, as for
example paedophiles might welcome now the courts ruling to undermine any charges againstthem of procuring a child for sexual purposes if they can alter their sex status merely by claiming20
that they mentally view to be so.
It appears to me that the intend of the legislation was to cater for the unfortunate people who
after birth may have been provided with the wrong sex status but regretfully the court now so to
say hijacked this for a conduct of social engineering on its own contemporary views, which I
view cannot be tolerated.25
If there are only 2 sexes male and female for reproduction purposes then the court
claiming a person to be of a non-specificsex cannot be justified, because it is not as such
a sexin a biological sense, for which the legislation of s32A appears to relate to.
I look forwards to your details response, if any courtesy will eventuate as such.30
Awaiting your response, G. H. Schorel-Hlavka O.W.B.(Friends call me Gerrit)
MAY JUSTICE ALWAYS PREVAIL35
(Our name is our motto!)
QUOTE 12-4-2014 CORRESPONDENCE
WITHOUT PREJUDICE
Mr Tony Abbott MP 12-4-201440
[email protected],[email protected]
20140412-G. H .Schorel-Hlavka O.W.B. to Mr Tony Abbott PM- Re Norrie HCA-marriage and non-specific gender - etc
Tony,45
Whereas a marriage is to be between a man and a woman the question now is what
constitutes to be a male and what constitutes to be a woman and what constitutes to be a non -
specific gender/sex? What constitutes a "sex affirmation procedure"? What constitutes a
person's sex may be indeterminate.? And one has to concern one selves also with the
statement by the court The material before the Registrar (and the Tribunal) was to the effect50
http://www.schorel-hlavka.com/http://www.schorel-hlavka.com/http://www.scrib.com/InspectorRikatihttp://www.scrib.com/InspectorRikatihttp://www.scrib.com/InspectorRikatimailto:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]://www.scrib.com/InspectorRikatihttp://www.schorel-hlavka.com/ -
8/12/2019 20140414-G. H. Schorel-Hlavka O.W.B. to Mr B. O'Farrell, Premier and Mr Tony Abbott PM- Re Norrie HCA-s42A an
5/16
p5 14-4-2014
INSPECTOR-RIKATI about the BLACK HOLE in the CONSTITUTION-DVD
A 1stedition limited special numbered book on Data DVDISBN 978-0-9803712-6-0
PLEASE NOTE: You may order books in the INSPECTOR-RIKATI seriesby making a reservation, See also
Http://www.schorel-hlavka.com Blog atHttp://www.scrib.com/InspectorRikati
that the sex affirmation procedure had not eliminated the ambiguities relating to Norrie'ssex.?
It is now that the reproductive organs and the genitals of a person are irrelevant as only the
alleged mental perception of the person now decides what a person might be from time to time?
So, a person ordinary a male in every sense merely have to assume the mental framework of5
being a non-specific gender person and that is it?
A female may ordinary have all female biological organs and physics in every sense merely have
to assume the mental framework of being a non -specific gender person and that is it? Or just
hold the view to be a male and that constitutes to be a female?
What about if the person holds the view to be some super human being or some creator or alien10
from outer space, is the Registrar of a court than required to register this person making the claim
as being an alien of outer space or being say the creator of all human being?
What legal status can be ascertained by this?
While the N.S.W. legislation appears to prohibit a person in a marriage to undergo a sex
affirmation procedure the Norrie case rather indicates that even with the sex affirmation15
procedure the person still somehow had not at all confirmed the sex what was supposed to
have been the aim but that because of the mental perceptions of Norrie the sex was not
affirmed. As such, the sex affirmation procedure cannot be deemed to be a critical issue to
determine a persons gender or non-specific gender.In my view there is a critical defect in the purported sex affirmation procedure if it fails to20
accomplish what was set out to be achieved.
Why did the experts involved to justify any medical procedure for a sex affirmation procedure
not detect what really was within the perceptions/mind, etc, of Norrie?
What now appears to me is that Norrie has male reproduction p\organs and female genitals and
the court refer to being in an indeterminate status. Obviously without female organs Norrie can25
never become a female in the biological sense. Nor can a female become a male lacking the
male reproduction system even if the medical profession create from skin a male genital.
What this essential provides for now is that people may undergo a sex affirmation procedure to
affirm what, a non-specific gender? Surely that never was the intention of the sex affirmation
procedure was set out to achieve. The word affirmation I view specifically is that it is to30affirm something that was deemed to exist all along. So, the so to sayshrinks who are involved
in justifying a sex affirmation procedure clear got it utterly wrong.
We had the 60Minutes television program that reported about a male desiring to become and
known as a female and underwent certain surgery and was given female hormones. Then some
time down the line 60 minutes provided an update that this alleged female now was back35
showing a beard and wanting to be a male and not a :female. As such the shrinks involved
in the sex affirmation procedure had it really utterly wrong.
What astounded me was the lack of any principle legal concepts referred to by the High court of
Australia in its Norrie decision as to establish if a person is a male, female or a non-specific
gender/sex.40
We have that municipal councils provide exclusive women swimming time at council poolswhere women are following Islamic religious customs. Whit a person like Norrie then No0rrie
could nevertheless go in the pool exclusively provided for women. And Norrie could go into the
male changing rooms also.
As I indicated in my previous writings, a male is a he/him and a female is her/she45
and I view a non-specific gender can be neither and so is an it.
To hold that a non-specific gender can referred to as he/him or female is her/she
makes a mockery of the non-specific gender.
As a CONSTITUTIONALISTI have the view that the Commonwealth of Australia would have
legislative powers to deal with this matter;50
http://www.schorel-hlavka.com/http://www.schorel-hlavka.com/http://www.scrib.com/InspectorRikatihttp://www.scrib.com/InspectorRikatihttp://www.scrib.com/InspectorRikatihttp://www.scrib.com/InspectorRikatihttp://www.schorel-hlavka.com/ -
8/12/2019 20140414-G. H. Schorel-Hlavka O.W.B. to Mr B. O'Farrell, Premier and Mr Tony Abbott PM- Re Norrie HCA-s42A an
6/16
p6 14-4-2014
INSPECTOR-RIKATI about the BLACK HOLE in the CONSTITUTION-DVD
A 1stedition limited special numbered book on Data DVDISBN 978-0-9803712-6-0
PLEASE NOTE: You may order books in the INSPECTOR-RIKATI seriesby making a reservation, See also
Http://www.schorel-hlavka.com Blog atHttp://www.scrib.com/InspectorRikati
Hansard1-3-1898Constitution Convention Debates (Official Record of the Debates of the NationalAustralasian Convention)
QUOTE
Mr. BARTON.-They do not require to get authority from home, for this reason: That the local
Constitutions empower the colonies separately to make laws for the peace, order, and good government5of the community, and that is without restriction, except such small restrictions as are imposed by the
Constitutions themselves, and, of course, the necessary restriction that they can only legislate for their
own territory. The position with regard to this Constitution is that it has no legislative power, except
that which is actually given to it in express terms or which is necessary or incidental to a power given.
END QUOTE10The commonwealth of Australia is clearly empowers to provide for passports of citizens to travel
abroad. The States cannot interfere with this constitutional legislative powers. Hence, no matter
what the N.S.W. registrar may be directed by the High court of Australia to register, the
Commonwealth of Australia is in that regard above the N.S.W. legislative powers. Therefore
when it comes to passports and marriage, etc, the Commonwealth of Australia would have15
legislative powers to determine what constitute legally a status of a male, female and if there
is such a thing as a non-specific gender/sex.
We must however also acknowledge that at times a child may be born of which the genitals are
not properly developed or at all. It may not be in the interest of the child to immediately demand
the child be assigned a certain sexual organ (genitals) and so the Commonwealth could legislate20
that a child may be held to be of a non-specific gender until the childs biological status hasbeen appropriately ascertained by what reproductive organs are within the child.
As such the Commonwealth of Australia may limit the usage of a persons status as a non-
specific gender/sex for say a period of 2 years, this as to prevent a misuse of this period as to
allow it to go on for unlimited time.25
In my view it would be essential that no child while having a status of being of a non-specific
gender/sex. This I view is essential for example as to avoid any child to be ending up in prison
while traveling overseas for merely entering a toilet that may be of a designated gender. Not
every country may support what alternative or other statuses the Commonwealth of Australia
may provide for. And, the Commonwealth could limit problems by making clear that the person30
designated for the time being as non-specific gender/sex however is considered to be a male or
a female. This, so the person can perhaps travel overseas and use toilets confirming the usage asprovided for in the passport.
The problem we seem to have is that being of a non-specific: gender/.sex appears considering
the Norries case to be now basedupon nothing else but what the mental perception might be of35
the person concerned. This is extremely problematic.
We have for example sports such as the Olympics. Are we not going to have a person with male
masculine features to proclaim to be a non-specific gender/sex or to be a female and then
being able to complete in female sport?
It is well known that the game standards for males and females are different in golf. If we40
were to apply the Norrie principle then a male golfer merely has to mentally assume to be a
female and then can play as a female in a female competition. In my view this kind of
mental perception is hilarious and absurd.
We must have appropriate legal standards to what constitute to be a male or a female or
non-specific gender/sex.45
If anything the Norrie case has now exposed the fraud within the so called sex affirmation
procedure industry, as clearly it didnt affirm anything, to the contrary it changed in this case a
male to an non-specific gender./sex.
Taxpayers should not have to feed the abuse of taxpayers monies to create what may be held by
many to be biological freaks.50
Medicare should not fund such purported sex affirmation procedure where in the end itaffirms nothing as in the end the mental status of the subject seems to determine what the
gender/sex is or may not be at all.
http://www.schorel-hlavka.com/http://www.schorel-hlavka.com/http://www.scrib.com/InspectorRikatihttp://www.scrib.com/InspectorRikatihttp://www.scrib.com/InspectorRikatihttp://www.scrib.com/InspectorRikatihttp://www.schorel-hlavka.com/ -
8/12/2019 20140414-G. H. Schorel-Hlavka O.W.B. to Mr B. O'Farrell, Premier and Mr Tony Abbott PM- Re Norrie HCA-s42A an
7/16
p7 14-4-2014
INSPECTOR-RIKATI about the BLACK HOLE in the CONSTITUTION-DVD
A 1stedition limited special numbered book on Data DVDISBN 978-0-9803712-6-0
PLEASE NOTE: You may order books in the INSPECTOR-RIKATI seriesby making a reservation, See also
Http://www.schorel-hlavka.com Blog atHttp://www.scrib.com/InspectorRikati
While the States may have legislative powers to determine the registration of births, deaths and
marriages, in the end it cannot override the commonwealth legislative powers to determine what
constitutes to be a male, female or a non-specific gender/sex.
As I understand it the specialist and medical team involved in the sex affirmation procedure all
seemed to rely upon the mental status of Norrie to change the male genitals to female genitals as5
this somehow was to change Norrie from a male to a female but then Norrie claims not to
have the mental perception to be either a male or a female and so claimed to be a non -
specific gender/sex.
In my view the Commonwealth of Australia ought to appeal the Norrie decision, this as none of
the judges appeared to have considered how any decision by the court could upset the social10
status and social application of so called non-specific gender/sex.
.
QUOTEDuncan v Queensland(1916) 22 CLR 556, 582 (per Griffith C.J.)
That case (a previous decision of the High Court, Foggit, Jones & Co v NSW (1915) 21 CLR357) was very briefly, and I regret to say, insufficiently argued and considered on the last15day of the Sydney sitting..... The arguments which now commend themselves to me asconclusive did not find entrance to my mind. In my judgment that case was wrongly decided,and should be overruled.
END QUOTE20
In my view, the Court failed to set out in its reason of judgment, and I view this omission was an
error in law, what it held constituted a status of non-specific gender/sex.
It is in my view merely social engineering by the court to somehow create a new kind of
gender/sex or non-existing sex/gender without stating what principles it relied upon to establish
in law why Norrie was neither a male or as female.25
This is a backdoor manner to legislate by the Court, a reported Mason CJ conduct.
The Court must remain impartial and couldnt accept a non-specific gender/sex without setting
out under what special conditions, including biological relevant issues, a person could be deemed
to be a non-specific gender/sex.
We have elected representatives to the parliament who are to express the intentions and the views30of those they represent in legislative provisions within the ambit of constitutional provided
legislative powers. Where then the legislators didnt provide for a non-specific gender/sex as
no definition existed to establish a person to be a non-specific gender/sex then I view the court
crossed the separation of powers and was not adjudicating but purported to legislate or use their
judgment to legislate.35
Basically it was a gross abuse and misuse of judicial powers.
While the Court did refer to that the N.S.W. legislation allowed for indeterminate registration
it failed (again) to set out what in legal terms constituted a person to be in an indeterminate
status. One may hold that when a male person undergoes a sex affirmation procedure to
remove the male genitals and create a female genital then this person may be held to be in an40
indeterminate situation during the sex affirmation procedure being conducted. However, noone in his/her right mind would hold that while this sex affirmation procedure is being
conducted someone then quickly goes to the Registrar to amend the registration from male to
non-specific gender/sex.
My concern is that those involved with the purported sex affirmation procedure may making a45
clear error of judgment in regard of Norrie, being an adult, then hardly can be trusted to know
when it comes to an under aged person. Again, the 60 Minutes reported case underlines this.
In my view all and any sex affirmation procedure must immediately stopped to go ahead as
taxpayers also are entitled to know if this alleged sex affirmation procedure is actually to
affirm some sex/gender or merely an abuse of taxpayers monies be used so to say to create so50
to say Franken stein monsters, etc.
http://www.schorel-hlavka.com/http://www.schorel-hlavka.com/http://www.scrib.com/InspectorRikatihttp://www.scrib.com/InspectorRikatihttp://www.scrib.com/InspectorRikatihttp://www.scrib.com/InspectorRikatihttp://www.schorel-hlavka.com/ -
8/12/2019 20140414-G. H. Schorel-Hlavka O.W.B. to Mr B. O'Farrell, Premier and Mr Tony Abbott PM- Re Norrie HCA-s42A an
8/16
p8 14-4-2014
INSPECTOR-RIKATI about the BLACK HOLE in the CONSTITUTION-DVD
A 1stedition limited special numbered book on Data DVDISBN 978-0-9803712-6-0
PLEASE NOTE: You may order books in the INSPECTOR-RIKATI seriesby making a reservation, See also
Http://www.schorel-hlavka.com Blog atHttp://www.scrib.com/InspectorRikati
If the court were to hold that the mental perception of a person determines the sex/gender or the
lack thereof then people can instantly change their sex/gender status pending then consider the
following;PROSECUTOR: Is it correct that you entered last Friday a female locker room?DEFENDANT: Yes.5PROSECUTOR: Is it correct that you are a male?
DEFENDANT: Yes.
PROSECUTOR: What is your excuse as a male to enter a female locker room?
DEFENDANT: I didnt.
PROSECUTOR: You didnt enter the locker room, are you changing your evidence you gave earlier?10DEFENDANT: I entered the female locker room as a female.
PROSECUTOR: May I ask you inform this court how you became a female?
DEFENDANT: I rely upon the Norrie case where as I understand it one merely has the mental conception to be of
a certain sex or not being of a certain sex and the court then accept this.
PROSECUTOR: Did you undergo any medical procedure to alter you from a male to a female? 15DEFENDANT: I understand from the Norrie case this is irrelevant, all one need to do is to have a certain status of
the mind and that determines if a person then is a male, female or of a non-specific
gender/sex.
PROSECUTOR: And your status of mind was at the time of entering the female locker room?
DEFENDANT: I had the status of female in my mind and so was entitled to enter the female changing room.20PROSECUTOR: Did you register this with the Registrar of birth, deaths and Marriage?
DEFENDANT: I am not aware that the Registrar determines the legal sex/gender status of any person. The
Registrar merely records what the person may claim at the time of the registration.
PROSECUTOR: And when did you consider in your mind to be a male again?
DEFENDANT: I saw those fed bodies and got scared to death that I didnt want to end up like that and left then25quickly and once I was outside the female locker room I realized I had the mental perception to
be a male again.PROSECUTOR: If you were scared about what you had seen why then did you enter the female changing room then
the following day. And is it correct that the police removed you upon complaints of the women
concerned?30DEFENDANT: I entered the female locker room because my mental status was again to be a woman and the
bodies I saw of the women surely confirmed this to be glad to be a woman. Just that the women
didnt like that I was in the female locker room and called the police. The Police refused toaccept that I had the mental status to be a female and removed me and charged me.
PROSECUTOR: So the police removed you?35 DEFENDANT: Yes they did. They didnt accept that my mental status determines if I am a male, female or non-
specific sex. Their argument was that as I had male genitals then I was deemed to be a male
regardless if I had a mental perception of being a female.
PROSECUTOR: Can you inform the court as to how do you change your mental status to being a male, female
or of a non-specific gender?40DEFENDANT: I cannot explain this as it just happens to come up. When I come near women playing golf I just
feel to be a woman and so start playing golf with them.
PROSECUTOR: It is correct that you entered last Saturday the female toilets of the primary school and the girls run
out of their toilets afraid of you?DEFENDANT: I was entering the toilet as a female as I was having the mental perception I was a female. Just45
that the girls didnt seem to accept me as a female.
PROSECUTOR: Do you know what legally defines a female?
JUDGE: Mr Prosecutor, I cannot allow this question and the accused doesnt have to respond tothis. If youhave an issue that the accused was not a female at each time the accused entered a female
changing room then you have the onus to prove the accused was not a female. How do you50contemplate to prove what was essential a status of the mind of the accused at each time of an
incident?
PROSECUTOR: Your Honour, surely this Honourable Court cannot accept that the mental status of a person
determines the person to be a male, female or of a non-specific gender/sex? The accused is
registered as a male.55JUDGE: So was Norrie and the High Court of Australia nevertheless held that despite a sex affirmation
procedure Norrie still was neither a male or a female and so was of no specific gender/sex,
this even so Norrie was born with male reproduction organs. As such, unless you can establish
the mental status of the accused not being that of a female, I am afraid you have no case.
PROSECUTOR: In the circumstances I seek to withdraw the charges without prejudice.60
http://www.schorel-hlavka.com/http://www.schorel-hlavka.com/http://www.scrib.com/InspectorRikatihttp://www.scrib.com/InspectorRikatihttp://www.scrib.com/InspectorRikatihttp://www.scrib.com/InspectorRikatihttp://www.schorel-hlavka.com/ -
8/12/2019 20140414-G. H. Schorel-Hlavka O.W.B. to Mr B. O'Farrell, Premier and Mr Tony Abbott PM- Re Norrie HCA-s42A an
9/16
p9 14-4-2014
INSPECTOR-RIKATI about the BLACK HOLE in the CONSTITUTION-DVD
A 1stedition limited special numbered book on Data DVDISBN 978-0-9803712-6-0
PLEASE NOTE: You may order books in the INSPECTOR-RIKATI seriesby making a reservation, See also
Http://www.schorel-hlavka.com Blog atHttp://www.scrib.com/InspectorRikati
JUDGE: I am not prepared to do so without prejudice. The accused appeared and is entitled to a judgment in
his favour where you obviously cannot prove any legal standards what constitute a person to be
a male, female or of a non-specific gender/sex. I dismiss the case with cost against the
State. The Defendant is free to go.
5
Pedophiles will enjoy this kind of mental status as what stops them to claim that at the time
accused of unlawfully interfering with a child they themselves held to be :mentally to be a child
of say 10 years old. What the High Court of Australia so to say did was to open a Pandora Box or
a can of worms where whatever the mental status of a person may have been at the time will bewhat may or may not determine the persons conduct to be lawful or not.10
No longer can a person be held liable as a male procuring a girl for sex, because the male may
claim to have the mental perception of being a female. Even to the question of a male raping a
female it may be argued that the male had the mental perception of being a female and in
defiance to her perceptions the male organ nevertheless pursued an intercourse with the other
female. If we go any further the purported female with male organs then can blame the victim for15
causing this fatal attraction to the male organs of this purported female.
We are so to say on a slippery slope that demand we get the Norrie judgment overturned and
based judgments upon realistic legal principles. We must have legal standards to establish when
is a person deemed to be a male, female or a Non-specific gender/sex.
20 When a person having male reproduction organs and male genitals can claim nevertheless to be a
woman in mind, and then upon that mental perception claim can obtain a sex affirmation
procedure (that actually is an oxymoron as it establish nothing) even so the person has no
female reproduction organs and no female genitals, etc, and must rely upon injection of female
hormones, then what is really being accomplished one may ask.25
As such, in the case of Norrie it cannot be questioned that Norrie become an it a non-
gender/sex person not having all relevant male items and neither all female items to enable to
claim to be either male or female and so ended up with becoming a non-specific gender/sex.
The same might be claimed with females undergoing a sex affirmation procedure to become a
male without ever being able to have male reproduction organs.30
While the medical profession may enjoy experiments with the human race and perhaps like toconstruct, if not already done so, a half man-beast in the end the question must be ask should
taxpayers monies be squandered on these kind of experiments at the cost of the sanity of their
victims?
http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/cases/cth/HCA/2014/11.html35
NSW Registrar of Births, Deaths and Marriages v Norrie [2014] HCA 11 (2 April 2014)
Last Updated: 2 April 2014
HIGH COURT OF AUSTRALIA
FRENCH CJ,40HAYNE, KIEFEL, BELL AND KEANE JJ
NSW REGISTRAR OF BIRTHS, DEATHS AND
MARRIAGES APPELLANT
AND
http://www.schorel-hlavka.com/http://www.schorel-hlavka.com/http://www.scrib.com/InspectorRikatihttp://www.scrib.com/InspectorRikatihttp://www.scrib.com/InspectorRikatihttp://www.austlii.edu.au/au/cases/cth/HCA/2014/11.htmlhttp://www.austlii.edu.au/au/cases/cth/HCA/2014/11.htmlhttp://www.austlii.edu.au/au/cases/cth/HCA/2014/11.htmlhttp://www.scrib.com/InspectorRikatihttp://www.schorel-hlavka.com/ -
8/12/2019 20140414-G. H. Schorel-Hlavka O.W.B. to Mr B. O'Farrell, Premier and Mr Tony Abbott PM- Re Norrie HCA-s42A an
10/16
p10 14-4-2014
INSPECTOR-RIKATI about the BLACK HOLE in the CONSTITUTION-DVD
A 1stedition limited special numbered book on Data DVDISBN 978-0-9803712-6-0
PLEASE NOTE: You may order books in the INSPECTOR-RIKATI seriesby making a reservation, See also
Http://www.schorel-hlavka.com Blog atHttp://www.scrib.com/InspectorRikati
NORRIE RESPONDENT
NSW Registrar of Births, Deaths and Marriages v Norrie[2014] HCA 11
2 April 20145S273/2013
ORDER
1. Set aside paragraph 3(b) of the order of the Court of Appeal of the Supreme Court of New South10Wales made on 14 June 2013 and, in its place, order that the respondent's applications dated 26 November
2009 be remitted to the NSW Registrar of Births, Deaths and Marriages for determination in accordance
with the reasons of this Court.
2. Appeal otherwise dismissed.3. Appellant to pay the respondent's costs of the appeal to this Court.15
On appeal from the Supreme Court of New South Wales
Representation
J K Kirk SC with K M Richardson for the appellant (instructed by Crown Solicitor (NSW))
D M J Bennett QC with A J Abadee for the respondent (instructed by DLA Piper Australia)
K L Walker with E A Bennett for A Gender Agenda Inc, as amicus curiae (instructed by Human Rights Law Centre)20
Notice: This copy of the Court's Reasons for Judgment is subject to formal revision prior to publication in the
Commonwealth Law Reports.
CATCHWORDS
NSW Registrar of Births, Deaths and Marriages v Norrie
StatutesInterpretationRegistrar's power to register a "change of sex" underBirths, Deaths and Marriages25Registration Act 1995(NSW)Respondent underwent sex affirmation procedureRespondent applied forregistration of change of sex under ActWhether Registrar has power to register change of sex to "non-specific".
Words and phrases"change of sex".
Births, Deaths and Marriages Registration Act1995(NSW),ss 32A,32DA,32DB,32DC,32J.
301. FRENCH CJ, HAYNE, KIEFEL, BELL AND KEANE JJ. Not all human beings can be classified
by sex as either male or female[1].TheBirths, Deaths and Marriages Registration Act 1995(NSW) ("theAct") expressly recognises that a person's sex may be ambiguous[2].It also recognises that a person's sex
may be sufficiently important to the individual concerned to warrant that person undergoing a sex
affirmation procedureto assist that person "to be considered to be a member of the opposite sex"[3].35When a person has undergone a sex affirmation procedure,s 32DCof theActempowers the Registrar to
register a change of sex of the person upon an application by that person.
2. The question in this appeal is whether it was within the Registrar's power to record in the Registerthat the sex of the respondent, Norrie[4],was, as she said in herapplication, "non-specific". That question
should be answered in the affirmative.40
http://www.schorel-hlavka.com/http://www.schorel-hlavka.com/http://www.scrib.com/InspectorRikatihttp://www.scrib.com/InspectorRikatihttp://www.scrib.com/InspectorRikatihttp://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/nsw/consol_act/bdamra1995383/http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/nsw/consol_act/bdamra1995383/http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/nsw/consol_act/bdamra1995383/http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/nsw/consol_act/bdamra1995383/http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/nsw/consol_act/bdamra1995383/http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/nsw/consol_act/bdamra1995383/http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/nsw/consol_act/bdamra1995383/http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/nsw/consol_act/bdamra1995383/http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/nsw/consol_act/bdamra1995383/s32a.htmlhttp://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/nsw/consol_act/bdamra1995383/s32a.htmlhttp://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/nsw/consol_act/bdamra1995383/s32a.htmlhttp://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/nsw/consol_act/bdamra1995383/s32da.htmlhttp://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/nsw/consol_act/bdamra1995383/s32da.htmlhttp://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/nsw/consol_act/bdamra1995383/s32da.htmlhttp://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/nsw/consol_act/bdamra1995383/s32db.htmlhttp://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/nsw/consol_act/bdamra1995383/s32db.htmlhttp://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/nsw/consol_act/bdamra1995383/s32db.htmlhttp://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/nsw/consol_act/bdamra1995383/s32dc.htmlhttp://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/nsw/consol_act/bdamra1995383/s32dc.htmlhttp://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/nsw/consol_act/bdamra1995383/s32dc.htmlhttp://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/nsw/consol_act/bdamra1995383/s32j.htmlhttp://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/nsw/consol_act/bdamra1995383/s32j.htmlhttp://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/nsw/consol_act/bdamra1995383/s32j.htmlhttp://www.austlii.edu.au/au/cases/cth/HCA/2014/11.html#fn1http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/cases/cth/HCA/2014/11.html#fn1http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/cases/cth/HCA/2014/11.html#fn1http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/nsw/consol_act/bdamra1995383/http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/nsw/consol_act/bdamra1995383/http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/nsw/consol_act/bdamra1995383/http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/nsw/consol_act/bdamra1995383/http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/nsw/consol_act/bdamra1995383/http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/nsw/consol_act/bdamra1995383/http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/cases/cth/HCA/2014/11.html#fn2http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/cases/cth/HCA/2014/11.html#fn2http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/cases/cth/HCA/2014/11.html#fn2http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/cases/cth/HCA/2014/11.html#fn3http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/cases/cth/HCA/2014/11.html#fn3http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/cases/cth/HCA/2014/11.html#fn3http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/nsw/consol_act/bdamra1995383/s32dc.htmlhttp://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/nsw/consol_act/bdamra1995383/s32dc.htmlhttp://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/nsw/consol_act/bdamra1995383/s32dc.htmlhttp://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/nsw/consol_act/bdamra1995383/http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/nsw/consol_act/bdamra1995383/http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/nsw/consol_act/bdamra1995383/http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/cases/cth/HCA/2014/11.html#fn4http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/cases/cth/HCA/2014/11.html#fn4http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/cases/cth/HCA/2014/11.html#fn4http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/cases/cth/HCA/2014/11.html#fn4http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/nsw/consol_act/bdamra1995383/http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/nsw/consol_act/bdamra1995383/s32dc.htmlhttp://www.austlii.edu.au/au/cases/cth/HCA/2014/11.html#fn3http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/cases/cth/HCA/2014/11.html#fn2http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/nsw/consol_act/bdamra1995383/http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/nsw/consol_act/bdamra1995383/http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/nsw/consol_act/bdamra1995383/http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/cases/cth/HCA/2014/11.html#fn1http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/nsw/consol_act/bdamra1995383/s32j.htmlhttp://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/nsw/consol_act/bdamra1995383/s32dc.htmlhttp://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/nsw/consol_act/bdamra1995383/s32db.htmlhttp://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/nsw/consol_act/bdamra1995383/s32da.htmlhttp://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/nsw/consol_act/bdamra1995383/s32a.htmlhttp://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/nsw/consol_act/bdamra1995383/http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/nsw/consol_act/bdamra1995383/http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/nsw/consol_act/bdamra1995383/http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/nsw/consol_act/bdamra1995383/http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/nsw/consol_act/bdamra1995383/http://www.scrib.com/InspectorRikatihttp://www.schorel-hlavka.com/ -
8/12/2019 20140414-G. H. Schorel-Hlavka O.W.B. to Mr B. O'Farrell, Premier and Mr Tony Abbott PM- Re Norrie HCA-s42A an
11/16
p11 14-4-2014
INSPECTOR-RIKATI about the BLACK HOLE in the CONSTITUTION-DVD
A 1stedition limited special numbered book on Data DVDISBN 978-0-9803712-6-0
PLEASE NOTE: You may order books in the INSPECTOR-RIKATI seriesby making a reservation, See also
Http://www.schorel-hlavka.com Blog atHttp://www.scrib.com/InspectorRikati
3. It is convenient to begin an explanation of the reasons why that is so by referring to the materialprovisions of theActwhile summarising the circumstances of Norrie's application to the Registrar.
TheActand the application
4. TheActprovides for the registration of births, deaths and marriages.Section 6of theActprovidesthat the Registrar is to "establish and maintain the registers necessary for the purposes of thisAct".55. The objects of theAct,stated ins 3,include "the recording of changes of sex". Pursuant tos43(1)of theAct,the Registrar must maintain a register of "registrable events".Section 4(1)provides that a
change of sex is a registrable event.6. The provisions of theActrelating to the registration of a change of sex are contained inPt 5A.They are engaged by an application made by an adult or, in respect of a child, by its parent or guardian.Part105Aof theActwas inserted by the Transgender (Anti-Discrimination and Other Acts Amendment) Act 1996
(NSW) ("the 1996 Amending Act"). The 1996 Amending Act made provision for the alteration of the
Register to record a change of sex in the case of persons born in New South Wales[5].
7. The Act was further amended by theCourts and Crimes Legislation Amendment Act 2008(NSW)to address the situation of people who were not born in New South Wales. This amendment added ss 32DA15to 32DD and s 32J to Pt 5A of the Act. This case concerns an application made under these provisions.
8. Section 32DA provides that a person whose birth was not registered in New South Wales mayapply to register that person's sex. Sub-section (1) is in the following terms:
"(1) A person who is 18 or above:
(a) who is an Australian citizen or permanent resident of Australia, and20(b) who lives, and has lived for at least one year, in New South Wales, and
(c) who has undergone a sex affirmation procedure, and
(d) who is not married, and
(e) whose birth is not registered under this Act or a corresponding law,
may apply to the Registrar, in a form approved by the Registrar, for the registration of the person's sex in the25Register."
9. Norrie was born in Scotland with male reproductive organs. In 1989 she underwent a "sexaffirmation procedure".10. A sex affirmation procedure is defined in s 32A as:
"a surgical procedure involving the alteration of a person's reproductive organs carried out:30
(a) for the purpose of assisting a person to be considered to be a member of the opposite sex, or
(b) to correct or eliminate ambiguities relating to the sex of the person."
13. Norrie considered that the surgery did not resolve hersexual ambiguity. Sheapplied on 26November 2009 for hersex to be registered under the Act as "non-specific".
14. Section 32DB of the Act requires that an application under s 32DA be accompanied by:35
"statutory declarations by 2 doctors, or by 2 medical practitioners ... verifying that the person the subject of theapplication has undergone a sex affirmation procedure".
13. In conformity with s 32DB, Norrie's application was accompanied by statutory declarations from
two medical practitioners. Each medical practitioner stated that Norrie had undergone a sex affirmationprocedure. Each also stated, in a pro forma sentence in the declaration, that he supported the application of40Norrie to have herbirth record altered showing the sex now to be non-specific. Despite the provision in the
statutory declaration for a statement of support, it had no apparent statutory significance as it was neither
required nor provided for by the Act or the regulations made under the Act.
14. Section 32DC of the Act provides for the determination of an application under s 32DA in thefollowing terms:45
"(1) The Registrar is to determine an application under section 32DA by registering the person's change of sexor
refusing to register the person's change of sex.
http://www.schorel-hlavka.com/http://www.schorel-hlavka.com/http://www.scrib.com/InspectorRikatihttp://www.scrib.com/InspectorRikatihttp://www.scrib.com/InspectorRikatihttp://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/nsw/consol_act/bdamra1995383/http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/nsw/consol_act/bdamra1995383/http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/nsw/consol_act/bdamra1995383/http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/nsw/consol_act/bdamra1995383/http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/nsw/consol_act/bdamra1995383/http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/nsw/consol_act/bdamra1995383/http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/nsw/consol_act/bdamra1995383/http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/nsw/consol_act/bdamra1995383/http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/nsw/consol_act/bdamra1995383/http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/nsw/consol_act/bdamra1995383/s6.htmlhttp://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/nsw/consol_act/bdamra1995383/s6.htmlhttp://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/nsw/consol_act/bdamra1995383/s6.htmlhttp://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/nsw/consol_act/bdamra1995383/http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/nsw/consol_act/bdamra1995383/http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/nsw/consol_act/bdamra1995383/http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/nsw/consol_act/bdamra1995383/http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/nsw/consol_act/bdamra1995383/http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/nsw/consol_act/bdamra1995383/http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/nsw/consol_act/bdamra1995383/http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/nsw/consol_act/bdamra1995383/http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/nsw/consol_act/bdamra1995383/http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/nsw/consol_act/bdamra1995383/s3.htmlhttp://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/nsw/consol_act/bdamra1995383/s3.htmlhttp://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/nsw/consol_act/bdamra1995383/s3.htmlhttp://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/nsw/consol_act/bdamra1995383/s43.htmlhttp://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/nsw/consol_act/bdamra1995383/s43.htmlhttp://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/nsw/consol_act/bdamra1995383/s43.htmlhttp://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/nsw/consol_act/bdamra1995383/s43.htmlhttp://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/nsw/consol_act/bdamra1995383/http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/nsw/consol_act/bdamra1995383/http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/nsw/consol_act/bdamra1995383/http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/nsw/consol_act/bdamra1995383/s4.htmlhttp://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/nsw/consol_act/bdamra1995383/s4.htmlhttp://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/nsw/consol_act/bdamra1995383/s4.htmlhttp://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/nsw/consol_act/bdamra1995383/http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/nsw/consol_act/bdamra1995383/http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/nsw/consol_act/bdamra1995383/http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/nsw/consol_act/bdamra1995383/index.html#p5ahttp://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/nsw/consol_act/bdamra1995383/index.html#p5ahttp://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/nsw/consol_act/bdamra1995383/index.html#p5ahttp://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/nsw/consol_act/bdamra1995383/index.html#p5ahttp://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/nsw/consol_act/bdamra1995383/index.html#p5ahttp://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/nsw/consol_act/bdamra1995383/index.html#p5ahttp://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/nsw/consol_act/bdamra1995383/index.html#p5ahttp://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/nsw/consol_act/bdamra1995383/http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/nsw/consol_act/bdamra1995383/http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/nsw/consol_act/bdamra1995383/http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/cases/cth/HCA/2014/11.html#fn5http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/cases/cth/HCA/2014/11.html#fn5http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/nsw/repealed_act/caclaa2008380/http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/nsw/repealed_act/caclaa2008380/http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/nsw/repealed_act/caclaa2008380/http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/nsw/repealed_act/caclaa2008380/http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/nsw/repealed_act/caclaa2008380/http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/nsw/repealed_act/caclaa2008380/http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/cases/cth/HCA/2014/11.html#fn5http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/nsw/consol_act/bdamra1995383/http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/nsw/consol_act/bdamra1995383/index.html#p5ahttp://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/nsw/consol_act/bdamra1995383/index.html#p5ahttp://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/nsw/consol_act/bdamra1995383/index.html#p5ahttp://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/nsw/consol_act/bdamra1995383/http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/nsw/consol_act/bdamra1995383/s4.htmlhttp://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/nsw/consol_act/bdamra1995383/http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/nsw/consol_act/bdamra1995383/s43.htmlhttp://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/nsw/consol_act/bdamra1995383/s43.htmlhttp://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/nsw/consol_act/bdamra1995383/s3.htmlhttp://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/nsw/consol_act/bdamra1995383/http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/nsw/consol_act/bdamra1995383/http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/nsw/consol_act/bdamra1995383/http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/nsw/consol_act/bdamra1995383/s6.htmlhttp://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/nsw/consol_act/bdamra1995383/http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/nsw/consol_act/bdamra1995383/http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/nsw/consol_act/bdamra1995383/http://www.scrib.com/InspectorRikatihttp://www.schorel-hlavka.com/ -
8/12/2019 20140414-G. H. Schorel-Hlavka O.W.B. to Mr B. O'Farrell, Premier and Mr Tony Abbott PM- Re Norrie HCA-s42A an
12/16
p12 14-4-2014
INSPECTOR-RIKATI about the BLACK HOLE in the CONSTITUTION-DVD
A 1stedition limited special numbered book on Data DVDISBN 978-0-9803712-6-0
PLEASE NOTE: You may order books in the INSPECTOR-RIKATI seriesby making a reservation, See also
Http://www.schorel-hlavka.com Blog atHttp://www.scrib.com/InspectorRikati
(2) Before registering a person's change of sex, the Registrar may require the applicant to provide such particulars
relating to the change of sexas may be prescribed by the regulations.
(3) A registration of a person's change of sex must not be made if the person is married."
15. Four points should be noted in respect of these provisions. First, a sex affirmationprocedure isdefined by reference to its purpose, not its outcome. Section 32DA(1)(c) does not refer to a "successful" sex5affirmation procedure.
16. Secondly, the function of the Registrar is principally that of recording in the Register informationprovided by members of the community. Section 32DB makes express provision for the verification of an
aspect of the information to be provided. Further, s 32DC(1) confers a limited and specific decision-making
power on the Registrar. While the Registrar may require such particulars "relating to the change of sex as10 may be prescribed by the regulations", neither the Act nor the regulations suggest that the Registrar'sfunction extends to the making of any moral or social judgments; it certainly does not extend to the
resolution of medical questions or the formation of a view about the outcome of a sex affirmationprocedure.
17. Thirdly, s 32DA is headed "Application to register change of sex"; but s 32DA(1) expressly15authorises an application by a person "for the registration of the person's sex" rather than "a change of sex".
Further, the modes of determination of an application under s 32DA provided by s 32DC, which involve
either registration or refusal of registration of a "change of sex", are not precisely congruent with the
express terms of s 32DA(1). It is tolerably clear, however, and it was not disputed, that s 32DC speaks of
the registration of, or refusal to register, a "person's change of sex" on the basis of a legislative assumption20that this first registration in New South Wales of an applicant's sex may differ from an earlier record (made
outside New South Wales) of that person's sex. On that basis, an application under s 32DA for the
registration of the sex of a person for the first time in New South Wales falls to be determined under s32DC by a registration of, or a refusal to register, the person's change of sex.
18. Fourthly, the 1996 Amending Act, which introduced Pt 5A (but not including ss 32DA to 32DD25and s 32J) into the Act, also amended theAnti-Discrimination Act 1977(NSW) by adding to that Act
definitions of "recognised transgender person" (a person "the record of whose sex is alteredunderPart
5Aof theBirths, Deaths and Marriages Registration Act 1995") and "transgender person" (which is
defined to include a person "who, being of indeterminate sex, identifies as a member of a particular sex by
living as a member of that sex"). These definitions in the 1996 Amending Act are part of the context in30which Pt 5A of the Act was enacted. Accordingly, the provisions of Pt 5A are to be applied in a context of
express legislative recognition of the existence of persons of "indeterminate sex".
19. Section 32J of the Act provides that registration of a person's sex under Pt 5A is effective todeem the person to be of that sex. Importantly, it has that effect subject to other New South Wales laws. It
relevantly provides:35
"(1) A person the record of whose sex is registered under this Part is, for the purposes of, butsubject to, any law of
New South Wales, a person of the sex so registered.
(2) A person to whom an interstate recognised details certificate relates is, for the purposes of, but subject to, any
law of New South Wales, a person of the sex stated in the certificate." (emphasis added)
The Registrar's decision40
20. In response to Norrie's application, the Registrar wrote to heron 24 February 2010 approving herapplication. The Registrar also approved an application by Norrie for the registration of a change of name.
The letter of 24 February attached a "Recognised Details (Change of Sex) Certificate" and a Change of
Name Certificate, each of which recorded Norrie's sex as "not specified". Later, the Registrar wrote toNorrie again, this time advising herthat the Recognised Details (Change of Sex) Certificate was invalid.45Norrie's Change of Name Certificate was re-issued recording Norrie's sex as "not stated".
21. Norrie lodged an application for review of the Registrar's decision in the Administrative DecisionsTribunal of New South Wales ("the Tribunal").
The course of proceedings
The Tribunal50
22. The issue before the Tribunal was whether it was open to the Registrar under s 32DC of theAct to register an applicant's sex as "non-specific". The Registrar argued that his powers were confined
to registering a person's sex as either "male" or "female"[6].
http://www.schorel-hlavka.com/http://www.schorel-hlavka.com/http://www.scrib.com/InspectorRikatihttp://www.scrib.com/InspectorRikatihttp://www.scrib.com/InspectorRikatihttp://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/nsw/consol_act/aa1977204/http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/nsw/consol_act/aa1977204/http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/nsw/consol_act/aa1977204/http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/nsw/consol_act/aa1977204/http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/nsw/consol_act/bdamra1995383/index.html#p5ahttp://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/nsw/consol_act/bdamra1995383/index.html#p5ahttp://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/nsw/consol_act/bdamra1995383/index.html#p5ahttp://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/nsw/consol_act/bdamra1995383/index.html#p5ahttp://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/nsw/consol_act/bdamra1995383/http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/nsw/consol_act/bdamra1995383/http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/nsw/consol_act/bdamra1995383/http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/cases/cth/HCA/2014/11.html#fn6http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/cases/cth/HCA/2014/11.html#fn6http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/cases/cth/HCA/2014/11.html#fn6http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/cases/cth/HCA/2014/11.html#fn6http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/nsw/consol_act/bdamra1995383/http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/nsw/consol_act/bdamra1995383/index.html#p5ahttp://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/nsw/consol_act/bdamra1995383/index.html#p5ahttp://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/nsw/consol_act/aa1977204/http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/nsw/consol_act/aa1977204/http://www.scrib.com/InspectorRikatihttp://www.schorel-hlavka.com/ -
8/12/2019 20140414-G. H. Schorel-Hlavka O.W.B. to Mr B. O'Farrell, Premier and Mr Tony Abbott PM- Re Norrie HCA-s42A an
13/16
p13 14-4-2014
INSPECTOR-RIKATI about the BLACK HOLE in the CONSTITUTION-DVD
A 1stedition limited special numbered book on Data DVDISBN 978-0-9803712-6-0
PLEASE NOTE: You may order books in the INSPECTOR-RIKATI seriesby making a reservation, See also
Http://www.schorel-hlavka.com Blog atHttp://www.scrib.com/InspectorRikati
23. The Tribunal found that, as a matter of fact, Norrie does not identify as male or female, but as"non-specific"[7],and that sheconsiders that identifying herself as male or female would be a false
statement[8].Nevertheless, the Tribunal concluded that it was not open to the Registrar to register hersex
as "non-specific"[9].In this regard, the Tribunal proceeded on the footing that "the Act is predicated on an
assumption that all people can be classified into two distinct and plainly identifiable sexes, male and female5... [T]he Registrar does not have the power under section 32DC of the Act to register a change of sex by a
person to 'Non specific'"[10].
24. Norrie appealed to the appeal panel of the Tribunal, which dismissed herappeal[11].
The Court of Appeal
25. Norrie appealed to the Court of Appeal of New South Wales, which allowed herappeal and10ordered that the decision of the Tribunal be set aside and that the matter be remitted to the Tribunal for
determination[12].
26. The Court of Appeal remitted the matter to the Tribunal because it held that the Act contemplatedthat Norrie might be assigned to a specific category of sex other than male or female such as " intersex",
"transgender" or "androgynous"[13].Whether the Tribunal should take that course was a matter which15would depend upon findings of fact which had not yet been made as to Norrie's specific sex
classification[14].
27. The Registrar appealed to this Court pursuant to special leave granted on 8 November 2013. It wasa condition of the grant of special leave that the Registrar pay Norrie's costs in this Court and that the order
for costs made in herfavour by the Court of Appeal not be disturbed.20
The arguments in this Court
28. The Registrar submitted that the Court of Appeal strayed too far from the text of the Act inreaching its conclusions. It was said that the Act does not contemplate a range of categories of sex,
additional to the "opposite" sexes of male and female. In particular, the definition of "sex affirmation
procedure" in s 32A suggests a process of seeking to become male or female, given that s 32A(a) states25that the sex affirmation procedure is carried out for the purpose of "assisting a person to be considered to
be a member of the opposite sex"; and to speak of the opposite sex is necessarily to speak only of male or
female. Further, the Registrar submitted, it is reasonable to expect that an intention to recognise anothercategory of "sex" would have been expressly stated in the Act. In this regard, the definition of "transgender"
inPt 3Aof theAnti-Discrimination Actdoes refer to a person being of an "indeterminate" sex; but,30
significantly, this language was not used in Pt 5A of the Act.29. The Registrar also argued that unacceptable confusion would flow from the acceptance of morethan two categories of sex given that s 32J of the Act affects the operation of other laws which assume the
binary division of sex. This particular argument will be addressed after the submissions made on behalf ofNorrie have been summarised.3530. Norrie submitted that the purpose of the Register is to state the truth about matters recorded in theRegister to the greatest possible extent. If the Act proceeded on the assumption that every person was male
or female, then s 32A(b) would be superfluous because any change of sex would fall within the scope of s
32A(a). A sex affirmation procedure described in s 32A(b) of the Act, the purpose of which is to "corrector eliminate ambiguities relating to the sex of the person", was said to be predicated upon legislative40recognition that not everyone may be classified as male or female. In this case, the sex affirmation
procedure, which is a precondition of an application under s 32DA, was carried out, but Norrie's sex
remained ambiguous so that it would be to record misinformation in the Register to classify heras male or
female. There is evident force in this submission.31. Norrie's counsel went further, arguing that, as the Court of Appeal accepted, Norrie might more45accurately be assigned to a category of sex such as "intersex" or "transgender". On this view, the expression
"change of sex" in s 32DC does not mean changing from one sex (male or female) to another (female or
male): a reference to change of sex simply means an "alteration" of a person's sex so that registration of
categories of sex such as "transgender" and "intersex" is within the scope of the Registrar's powers under s
32DC. This further argument goes too far; it should be rejected.5032. The Registrar's submission that the Act recognises only male or female as registrable classes ofsex must be accepted. But to accept that submission does not mean that the Act requires that this
classification can apply, or is to be applied, to everyone. And there is nothing in the Act which suggests that
the Registrar is entitled, much less duty-bound, to register the classification of a person's sex inaccurately as
male or female having regard to the information which the Act requires to be provided by the applicant.55
http://www.schorel-hlavka.com/http://www.schorel-hlavka.com/http://www.scrib.com/InspectorRikatihttp://www.scrib.com/InspectorRikatihttp://www.scrib.com/InspectorRikatihttp://www.austlii.edu.au/au/cases/cth/HCA/2014/11.html#fn7http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/cases/cth/HCA/2014/11.html#fn7http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/cases/cth/HCA/2014/11.html#fn7http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/cases/cth/HCA/2014/11.html#fn8http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/cases/cth/HCA/2014/11.html#fn8http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/cases/cth/HCA/2014/11.html#fn8http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/cases/cth/HCA/2014/11.html#fn9http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/cases/cth/HCA/2014/11.html#fn9http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/cases/cth/HCA/2014/11.html#fn9http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/cases/cth/HCA/2014/11.html#fn10http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/cases/cth/HCA/2014/11.html#fn10http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/cases/cth/HCA/2014/11.html#fn10http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/cases/cth/HCA/2014/11.html#fn11http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/cases/cth/HCA/2014/11.html#fn11http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/cases/cth/HCA/2014/11.html#fn11http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/cases/cth/HCA/2014/11.html#fn12http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/cases/cth/HCA/2014/11.html#fn12http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/cases/cth/HCA/2014/11.html#fn13http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/cases/cth/HCA/2014/11.html#fn13http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/cases/cth/HCA/2014/11.html#fn13http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/cases/cth/HCA/2014/11.html#fn14http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/cases/cth/HCA/2014/11.html#fn14http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/cases/cth/HCA/2014/11.html#fn14http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/nsw/consol_act/aa1977204/index.html#p3ahttp://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/nsw/consol_act/aa1977204/index.html#p3ahttp://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/nsw/consol_act/aa1977204/index.html#p3ahttp://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/nsw/consol_act/aa1977204/http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/nsw/consol_act/aa1977204/http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/nsw/consol_act/aa1977204/http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/nsw/consol_act/aa1977204/http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/nsw/consol_act/aa1977204/index.html#p3ahttp://www.austlii.edu.au/au/cases/cth/HCA/2014/11.html#fn14http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/cases/cth/HCA/2014/11.html#fn13http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/cases/cth/HCA/2014/11.html#fn12http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/cases/cth/HCA/2014/11.html#fn11http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/cases/cth/HCA/2014/11.html#fn10http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/cases/cth/HCA/2014/11.html#fn9http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/cases/cth/HCA/2014/11.html#fn8http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/cases/cth/HCA/2014/11.html#fn7http://www.scrib.com/InspectorRikatihttp://www.schorel-hlavka.com/ -
8/12/2019 20140414-G. H. Schorel-Hlavka O.W.B. to Mr B. O'Farrell, Premier and Mr Tony Abbott PM- Re Norrie HCA-s42A an
14/16
p14 14-4-2014
INSPECTOR-RIKATI about the BLACK HOLE in the CONSTITUTION-DVD
A 1stedition limited special numbered book on Data DVDISBN 978-0-9803712-6-0
PLEASE NOTE: You may order books in the INSPECTOR-RIKATI seriesby making a reservation, See also
Http://www.schorel-hlavka.com Blog atHttp://www.scrib.com/InspectorRikati
Additional categories of sex
33. As a matter of the ordinary use of language, to speak of the opposite sex is to speak of thecontrasting categories of sex: male and female[15].Yet given the terms of s 32A(b) and the context in
which it is to be construed, the Act recognises that a person's sex may be indeterminate.
34. Norrie's application to the Registrar and the Registrar's determination did not give rise to an5occasion to consider whether Pt 5A contemplates the existence of specific categories of sex other than male
and female, such as "intersex", "transgender" or "androgynous". It was unnecessary to do so given that the
Act recognises that a person's sex may be neither male nor female.
35. The Registrar's initial determination of Norrie's application was right. The appropriate record ofherchange of sex was from "male" (as it may be taken to have previously been recorded outside of New10South Wales) to "non-specific". To make that record in the Register would be no more than to recognise, asthe Act does, that not everyone is male or female and that the change to be registered was from an assumed
registered classification outside of New South Wales as a male to, as Norrie's application put it, non-
specific.
Ambiguities and indeterminacy15
36. The Registrar's submission must be rejected at the point at which it insists that the Registrar isrequired to decide whether he or sheis satisfied (let alone that it has been demonstrated objectively) that,
despite an application showing persisting ambiguity in the sex of the applicant following a sexaffirmation procedure, the applicant's sex should be recorded in the Register as being either male or
female. The registration of a change of sex records the facts supplied by the application so long as the20application is supported in accordance with s 32DB.
37. The provision of the Act which acknowledges "ambiguities" and the context of the 1996Amending Act, which referred to persons of "indeterminate sex", are a sufficient indication that the Act
recognises that, as this Court observed inAB v Western Australia[16],"the sex of a person is not ... in everycase unequivocally male or female."2538. There is nothing in the text of the Act which gives support to the view that the Registrar mustinitiate, much less resolve, a dispute concerning matters of fact and expert opinions presented to the
Registrar under ss 32DA and 32DB. Such a role would not be consistent with the provisions of the Act
which charge the Registrar with the role of establishing and maintaining the registers by recording
information provided by members of the community.3039. There may be occasions when the Registrar is prompted by the circumstances of an application to
address a concern as to whether an application to record a state of affairs in the Register is made in goodfaith. But this is not such an occasion. There is no suggestion that Norrie's application was not made in
good faith. Norrie had undergone a sex affirmation procedure and verified that fact as required by s
32DB of the Act. Norrie's application was not deficient in terms of the information required by the Act.35The opinions of the medical practitioners required by s 32DB were to the same effect as Norrie's own
statement. The material before the Registrar (and the Tribunal) was to the effect that the sex affirmation
procedure had not eliminated the ambiguities relating to Norrie's sex.In these circumstances no
question was raised by Norrie's application which required the Registrar to pursue or resolve any further
issue.4040. It was open to the Registrar, in the exercise of the power conferred by s 32DC, to register Norrie'schange of sex by recording the change from classification as male to non-specific. Moreover, there was
no reason for the matter to be remitted to the Tribunal to make further findings of fact in order for the
matter to be finally determined.
Section 32J45
41. The submission made on behalf of the Registrar that, given s 32J of the Act, unacceptableconfusion would ensue if the Act recognised more than two categories of sex or an "uncategorised" sex
should be rejected.
42. The difficulty foreshadowed by this argument could only arise in cases where other legislationrequires that a person is classified as male or female for the purpose of legal relations. For the most part, the50sex of the individuals concerned is irrelevant to legal relations. In this regard,s 8(a)of theInterpretation
Act 1987(NSW) provides that "[i]n any Act or instrument ... a word or expression that indicates one or
more particular genders shall be taken to indicate every other gender". The chief, perhaps the only, case
where the sex of the parties to the relationship is legally significant is marriage, as defined in the fashion
found ins 5(1)of theMarriage Act 1961(Cth)[17].55
http://www.schorel-hlavka.com/http://www.schorel-hlavka.com/http://www.scrib.com/InspectorRikatihttp://www.scrib.com/InspectorRikatihttp://www.scrib.com/InspectorRikatihttp://www.austlii.edu.au/au/cases/cth/HCA/2014/11.html#fn15http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/cases/cth/HCA/2014/11.html#fn15http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/cases/cth/HCA/2014/11.html#fn16http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/cases/cth/HCA/2014/11.html#fn16http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/cases/cth/HCA/2014/11.html#fn16http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/nsw/consol_act/ia1987191/s8.htmlhttp://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/nsw/consol_act/ia1987191/s8.htmlhttp://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/nsw/consol_act/ia1987191/s8.htmlhttp://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/nsw/consol_act/ia1987191/http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/nsw/consol_act/ia1987191/http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/nsw/consol_act/ia1987191/http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/nsw/consol_act/ia1987191/http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/nsw/consol_act/ia1987191/http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/cth/consol_act/ma196185/s5.htmlhttp://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/cth/consol_act/ma196185/s5.htmlhttp://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/cth/consol_act/ma196185/s5.htmlhttp://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/cth/consol_act/ma196185/http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/cth/consol_act/ma196185/http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/cth/consol_act/ma196185/http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/cth/consol_act/ma196185/http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/cases/cth/HCA/2014/11.html#fn17http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/cases/cth/HCA/2014/11.html#fn17http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/cases/cth/HCA/2014/11.html#fn17http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/cases/cth/HCA/2014/11.html#fn17http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/cth/consol_act/ma196185/http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/cth/consol_act/ma196185/http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/cth/consol_act/ma196185/s5.htmlhttp://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/nsw/consol_act/ia1987191/http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/nsw/consol_act/ia1987191/http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/nsw/consol_act/ia1987191/http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/nsw/consol_act/ia1987191/s8.htmlhttp://www.austlii.edu.au/au/cases/cth/HCA/2014/11.html#fn16http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/cases/cth/HCA/2014/11.html#fn15http://www.scrib.com/InspectorRikatihttp://www.schorel-hlavka.com/ -
8/12/2019 20140414-G. H. Schorel-Hlavka O.W.B. to Mr B. O'Farrell, Premier and Mr Tony Abbott PM- Re Norrie HCA-s42A an
15/16
p15 14-4-2014
INSPECTOR-RIKATI about the BLACK HOLE in the CONSTITUTION-DVD
A 1stedition limited special numbered book on Data DVDISBN 978-0-9803712-6-0
PLEASE NOTE: You may order books in the INSPECTOR-RIKATI seriesby making a reservation, See also
Http://www.schorel-hlavka.com Blog atHttp://www.scrib.com/InspectorRikati
43. As the Registrar acknowledged, the circumstance that s 32J operates subject to other laws of NewSouth Wales serves to ensure that where another Act does differentiate between male and female it will
prevail over s 32J so that an individual is not left in a "legal no-man's land". The Registrar during the
course of argument did not identify any particular statute which could not be construed so as to
operate as intended in respect of a person whose sex was recorded in the Register as "non-specific".544. The Registrar's argument from inconvenience should be rejected.
Conclusions and orders
45. The Court of Appeal went beyond the scope of Norrie's application to the Registrar and the issueas to the Registrar's power under s 32DC raised by the Registrar's refusal to record her sexas "non-specific". While the Court of Appeal did not proceed without encouragement from Norrie's counsel[18],it10was neither necessary nor appropriate for it to accept that encouragement. It would have been sufficient for
it to determine the issue raised by the determination of Norrie's application and the appeal from the
Tribunal to hold that the Tribunal erred in answering the question as to the Registrar's power under s 32DC
on the basis that the Act is predicated on the assumption that "all people can be classified into two distinct
and plainly identifiable sexes, male and female."[19]1546. The Act does not require that people who, having undergone a sex affirmation procedure, remainof indeterminate sexthat is, neither male nor femalemust be registered, inaccurately, as one or the
other. The Act itself recognises that a person may be other than male or female and therefore may be taken
to permit the registration sought, as "non-specific".
47. Accordingly, the orders of the Court of Appeal should be varied to the extent of setting aside the20order of the Court of Appeal remitting the matter to the Tribunal, and ordering that Norrie's applications tothe Registrar of 26 November 2009 should be remitted to the Registrar for determination in accordance
with these reasons. Otherwise, the appeal should be dismissed.
48. In accordance with the conditions subject to which special leave was granted, the order as to costsmade by the Court of Appeal should not be disturbed, and the Registrar must pay Norrie's costs of the25appeal to this Court.
[1]Corbett v Corbett[1971] P 83at 100;Bellinger v Bellinger [2003] 2 AC 467 at 472 [5]-[6];AB v Western
Australia[2011] HCA 42;(2011) 244 CLR 390at 402[23];[2011] HCA 42.
[2]Section 32A(b).30
[3]Section 32A(a).
[4]The respondent uses, and these reasons use, the personal pronouns "she" and "her" to refer to the respondent.
[5]Sections 32B to 32D.
[6]Norrie v Registry of Births Deaths and Marriages[2011] NSWADT 102at[38],[91].
[7]Norrie v Registry of Births Deaths and Marriages[2011] NSWADT 102at[5].35
[8]Norrie v Registry of Births Deaths and Marriages[2011] NSWADT 102at[95].
[9]Norrie v Registry of Births Deaths and Marriages[2011] NSWADT 102at[54].
[10]Norrie v Registry of Births Deaths and Marriages[2011] NSWADT 102at[98]-[99].
[11]Norrie v Registrar of Births, Deaths and Marriages[2011] NSWADTAP 53at[20].
[12]Norrie v NSW Registrar of Births, Deaths and Marriages[2013] NSWCA 145at[207].40
[13]Norrie v NSW Registrar of Births, Deaths and Marriages[2013] NSWCA 145at[200]-[205], [257], [288]-[290].
http://www.schorel-hlavka.com/http://www.schorel-hlavka.com/http://www.scrib.com/InspectorRikatihttp://www.scrib.com/InspectorRikatihttp://www.scrib.com/InspectorRikatihttp://www.austlii.edu.au/au/cases/cth/HCA/2014/11.html#fn18http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/cases/cth/HCA/2014/11.html#fn18http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/cases/cth/HCA/2014/11.html#fn18http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/cases/cth/HCA/2014/11.html#fn19http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/cases/cth/HCA/2014/11.html#fn19http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/cases/cth/HCA/2014/11.html#fn19http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/cases/cth/HCA/2014/11.html#fnB1http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/cases/cth/HCA/2014/11.html#fnB1http://www.austlii.edu.au/cgi-bin/LawCite?cit=%5b1971%5d%20P%2083http://www.austlii.edu.au/cgi-bin/LawCite?cit=%5b1971%5d%20P%2083http://www.austlii.edu.au/cgi-bin/LawCite?cit=%5b1971%5d%20P%2083http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/cases/cth/HCA/2011/42.htmlhttp://www.austlii.edu.au/au/cases/cth/HCA/2011/42.htmlhttp://www.austlii.edu.au/au/cases/cth/HCA/2011/42.htmlhttp://www.austlii.edu.au/cgi-bin/LawCite?cit=%282011%29%20244%20CLR%20390http://www.austlii.edu.au/cgi-bin/LawCite?cit=%282011%29%20244%20CLR%20390http://www.austlii.edu.au/cgi-bin/LawCite?cit=%282011%29%20244%20CLR%20390http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/cases/cth/HCA/2011/42.html#para23http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/cases/cth/HCA/2011/42.html#para23http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/cases/cth/HCA/2011/42.html#para23http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/cases/cth/HCA/2011/42.htmlhttp://www.austlii.edu.au/au/cases/cth/HCA/2011/42.htmlhttp://www.austlii.edu.au/au/cases/cth/HCA/2011/42.htmlhttp://www.austlii.edu.au/au/cases/cth/HCA/2014/11.html#fnB2http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/cases/cth/HCA/2014/11.html#fnB2http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/cases/cth/HCA/2014/11.html#fnB3http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/cases/cth/HCA/2014/11.html#fnB3http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/cases/cth/HCA/2014/11.html#fnB4http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/cases/cth/HCA/2014/11.html#fnB4http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/cases/cth/HCA/2014/11.html#fnB5http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/cases/cth/HCA/2014/11.html#fnB5http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/cases/cth/HCA/2014/11.html#fnB6http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/cases/cth/HCA/2014/11.html#fnB6http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/cases/nsw/NSWADT/2011/102.htmlhttp://www.austlii.edu.au/au/cases/nsw/NSWADT/2011/102.htmlhttp://www.austlii.edu.au/au/cases/nsw/NSWADT/2011/102.htmlhttp://www.austlii.edu.au/au/cases/nsw/NSWADT/2011/102.html#para38http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/cases/nsw/NSWADT/2011/102.html#para38http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/cases/nsw/NSWADT/2011/102.html#para38http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/cases/cth/HCA/2014/11.html#fnB7http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/cases/cth/HCA/2014/11.html#fnB7http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/cases/nsw/NSWADT/2011/102.htmlhttp://www.austlii.edu.au/au/cases/nsw/NSWADT/2011/102.htmlhttp://www.austlii.edu.au/au/cases/nsw/NSWADT/2011/102.htmlhttp://www.austlii.edu.au/au/cases/nsw/NSWADT/2011/102.html#para5http://www.a