Aaron Harkins v The Queen

Link copied
Case Copied 1 min read

AARON HARKINS

v

THE QUEEN

S73/2016
[2016] HCASL 194

  1. The applicant requires an extension of time in order to bring his application for special leave to appeal.  To grant an extension would be futile.  The decision of the Court of Criminal Appeal of the Supreme Court of New South Wales was plainly correct.  No question suitable for the grant of special leave is raised by the application.  Special leave is refused.

  2. Pursuant to r 41.08.1 of the High Court Rules 2004 (Cth), we direct the Registrar to draw up, sign and seal orders dismissing the application.

V.M. Bell
31 August 2016 		P.A. Keane
CaseChat AU logo

Keep reading for free

Create a free CaseChat account to read Aaron Harkins v The Queen and more:

  • Read every judgment in full
  • Ask AI and get answers linked to paragraphs
  • See how each paragraph was cited in later cases
  • Download judgments as PDF or Word
Continue with Google

One click creates your free account or signs you in.

By continuing you agree to the Terms and Privacy Policy.

Details
Case
[2016] HCASL 194
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Aaron Harkins sought an extension of time to lodge his application for special leave to appeal against his conviction and sentence in the Supreme Court of New South Wales. The High Court was asked to grant the extension, and determine whether special leave should be granted to appeal the decision of the Court of Criminal Appeal of the Supreme Court of New South Wales. The Court was required to consider whether there was any arguable ground that would warrant an extension of time or the grant of special leave. The legal issue was whether the Court should grant an extension of time and special leave to appeal, and whether any arguable ground for appeal existed.

The Court found that the decision of the Court of Criminal Appeal of the Supreme Court of New South Wales was plainly correct, and no question suitable for the grant of special leave was raised by the application. The Court noted that the applicant had failed to demonstrate any arguable ground that would warrant an extension of time or the grant of special leave. The Court held that the applicant had not established any basis to grant special leave, and the application was futile. The Court held that the applicant had failed to demonstrate that the appeal would have a reasonable chance of success.

Accordingly, the Court held that it would be futile to grant an extension of time and special leave to appeal. The Court found that the application did not raise any arguable ground that would warrant the grant of special leave. The Court held that no question suitable for the grant of special leave was raised by the application, and that the decision of the Court of Criminal Appeal of the Supreme Court of New South Wales was plainly correct.

The Court refused the application for an extension of time and for special leave to appeal. Pursuant to r 41.08.1 of the High Court Rules 2004 (Cth), the Registrar was directed to draw up, sign and seal orders dismissing the application.

Orders

Orders of the court

Full text does not contain this section.

Background

Background to the litigation

Full text does not contain this section.

Evidence

Evidence Before The Court

Full text does not contain this section.

Decision

Reasons for decision

Full text does not contain this section.

Ratio Decidendi

Legal Principle Established

Full text does not contain this section.