Bartlett v Commonwealth Director of Public Prosecutions

Bartlett sought leave to appeal against a decision of the Supreme Court of Western Australia which set aside a summons for the production of documents. The application was brought against the Commonwealth Director of Public Prosecutions, who was the respondent in the primary proceeding. The central issue was whether Bartlett's appeal was competent given the appeal rights of parties in criminal proceedings. The court had to determine if the appeal rights were exhaustively and exclusively covered by the Criminal Appeals Act 2004 (WA). The court also considered the question of indemnity costs and whether Bartlett had an arguable case on jurisdiction. Additionally, the court examined the evidentiary basis for any adverse inference as to Bartlett's motives for bringing the appeal.

The court found that the appeal was incompetent because Bartlett's rights of appeal were exclusively provided for under the Criminal Appeals Act 2004 (WA). It was determined that Bartlett's application for leave to appeal did not fall within the scope of the Act's provisions. Furthermore, the court held that Bartlett did not have an arguable case on jurisdiction. The court also found that there was an evidentiary basis for an adverse inference as to Bartlett's motives for bringing the appeal. Given these findings, the appeal was dismissed. The court ordered that Bartlett pay the respondents' costs of the appeal, including the strike-out application, on a party/party basis, to be taxed.