Anzac v Flynn

Anzac v Flynn was a case heard by the Supreme Court of the Northern Territory. The appellant, Anzac, was convicted of domestic violence related offences and was appealing against his conviction and sentence. Anzac argued that his failure to institute his appeal within the required time was due to circumstances beyond his control and that the court should exercise its discretion to allow the appeal. The court was required to determine whether Anzac had done what was reasonably practicable to institute his appeal within the required time, and whether the court should exercise its discretion to allow the appeal despite the late filing.

The court considered the relevant legislative provisions and case law in determining whether Anzac had done what was reasonably practicable in the circumstances. The court found that Anzac had taken steps to engage legal representation and had acted promptly once he became aware of the need to lodge an appeal. The court held that Anzac had done what was reasonably practicable in the circumstances and exercised its discretion to allow the appeal. However, the court found that the grounds of appeal regarding the sentence were not made out. The court held that the sentence imposed was not manifestly excessive and that the totality principle had been properly applied.

The Supreme Court of the Northern Territory dismissed Anzac’s appeal against his conviction but allowed the appeal against his sentence. The conviction was upheld, and Anzac was found guilty of the domestic violence related offences. However, the sentence was quashed and the matter was remitted to the Magistrates Court for re-sentencing. The court ordered that Anzac be re-sentenced by the Magistrates Court, taking into account the totality principle and the circumstances of the case.