Conomy v Maden

The applicant, Christopher Maden, sought special leave to appeal to the High Court of Australia against a decision of the Court of Appeal of Western Australia, which had refused him leave to appeal against a conviction for breaching a violence restraining order. The conviction arose from SMS text messages sent to the "Person Protected" in contravention of an interim order issued by the Magistrates' Court of Western Australia. The applicant's appeal to the Supreme Court of Western Australia had previously been dismissed.

The primary legal issue before the High Court was whether the applicant should be granted an extension of time and leave to reinstate his application for special leave to appeal, and whether his proposed documents for satisfying rule 41.10.3 of the High Court Rules 2004 (Cth) should be accepted for filing. This followed the applicant's failure to file a written case within the prescribed time, leading to his application for special leave being deemed abandoned. The applicant also sought that his application be decided by a different judge and without a hearing.

The High Court, constituted by Justice Gordon, dismissed the applicant's summons. Her Honour concluded that it would be futile to reinstate the application and enlarge the time for compliance, as the application for special leave would have no prospect of success. Justice Gordon found the applicant's explanation for failing to file his written case unsatisfactory and noted that the applicant's current application was effectively a redetermination of a previous application already rejected by her Honour, rendering it incompetent and an abuse of process. The Court also observed that the Court of Appeal had not erred in grouping the applicant's numerous grounds of appeal.

The High Court ordered that the applicant's application be dismissed. Furthermore, the Registrar was directed to refuse to issue or file any further documents tendered by the applicant in this proceeding without the leave of a Justice first being obtained.