This is all very weird.
Papers 1 and 2 from 2008 share the same hot case entries. It is almost as if the examiners copied and pasted the contents of Paper 1 directly into Paper 2. However, Paper 2 has a few extra entries, starting from case 15.
It is difficult to reverse-engineer the cascade of events which might have led to this. I can only imagine that a lonely CICM secretary went quietly insane on one cold Melbourne night, and made a series of unusual word processing choices.
In order to maintain order, I have left the first paper of 2008 completely empty, and put all the duplicate hot cases in Paper 2.