Barac v Director of Public Prosecutions (Qld)

[2007] HCATrans 571

[2007] HCATrans 571

IN THE HIGH COURT OF AUSTRALIA

Office of the Registry
  Brisbane  No B24 of 2007

B e t w e e n -

MARIUS OVIDIU BARAC

Applicant

and

DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC PROSECUTIONS (QLD)

Respondent

Application for special leave to appeal

Publication of reasons and pronouncement of orders

GUMMOW J
KIEFEL J

TRANSCRIPT OF PROCEEDINGS

AT CANBERRA ON WEDNESDAY, 3 OCTOBER 2007, AT 9.46 AM

Copyright in the High Court of Australia

GUMMOW J:   Between March and April 2003, the applicant was charged with a series of offences including trafficking, production, supply and possession of heroin, and the applicant was committed to stand trial in the Supreme Court of Queensland.  Following an agreement between the applicant's solicitors and the Director of Public Prosecutions, the charges relating to trafficking were not pursued, and an indictment was presented on 10 June 2004 charging the applicant with offences related to possession only.

After a review of evidence by the DPP, the applicant was charged on 28 June 2005 with unlawfully trafficking in a dangerous drug.  The applicant sought a permanent stay of the committal proceedings in relation to that charge, alleging that they were an abuse of process and that he had been prejudiced by the departure from the DPP's previous position.

On 29 August 2006, Wilson J refused a stay.  Her Honour was not satisfied that the proceedings were an abuse of process and, in light of undertakings made to the Court by the DPP, her Honour was not satisfied that the applicant had suffered prejudice that would justify a permanent stay.

On 5 April 2007, the Court of Appeal dismissed the applicant's appeal.  The decision of Wilson J was discretionary, and McMurdo P, Jerrard and Keane JJA found no error in the manner in which that discretion was exercised, nor the outcome that her Honour reached.

The application for special leave to appeal does not advance any question of law that would justify the intervention of this Court.  There are no prospects of success on any appeal to this Court.  Special leave is refused.

Pursuant to r 41.11.1 we direct the Registrar to draw up, sign and seal an order dismissing the application for special leave.  I publish the disposition signed by Justice Kiefel and myself.

AT 9.48 AM THE MATTER WAS CONCLUDED