Corica v Throssell [No 2]

JURISDICTION : SUPREME COURT OF WESTERN AUSTRALIA

TITLE OF COURT : THE COURT OF APPEAL (WA)

CITATION: CORICA -v- THROSSELL [No 2] [2017] WASCA 210

CORAM: BUSS P
MAZZA JA

HEARD: ON THE PAPERS

DELIVERED : 6 SEPTEMBER 2017

PUBLISHED : 15 NOVEMBER 2017

FILE NO/S: CACR 64 of 2017
CACR 124 of 2017
CACR 125 of 2017

BETWEEN: SALVATORE CORICA
Appellant
AND
JONATHAN THROSSELL
Respondent

ON APPEAL FROM:
Jurisdiction              :  SUPREME COURT OF WESTERN AUSTRALIA
Coram  :McKECHNIE J
File No  :SJA 1055 of 2012, SJA 1056 of 2012

Catchwords:

Criminal law - Practice and procedure - Application to adjourn leave application hearing

Legislation:

Nil

Result:

Application dismissed

Category: B

Representation:

Counsel:

Appellant: In person
Respondent: Mr A Wadham

Solicitors:

Appellant: In person
Respondent: McLeods Barristers & Solicitors

Case(s) referred to in judgment(s):

Corica v Throssell [2017 WASCA 209

REASONS OF THE COURT: These reasons should be read in conjunction with the reasons in Corica v Throssell (CACR 64, CACR 124 and CACR 125 of 2017)[1] and concern an application made by the appellant filed on 5 September 2017 to adjourn the hearing of the abovementioned matters listed for 14 September 2017. On 6 September 2017, we dismissed the application on the papers. These are our reasons for refusing the application for an adjournment.
[1] Corica v Throssell [2017 WASCA 209.
The application was supported by an affidavit sworn by the appellant on 5 September 2017. The appellant deposed that on 14 August 2017 he had a full knee replacement on his left knee and since that time he had encountered 'problems with mobility' as well as 'with drugs containing morphine' which he is using for pain relief. He also claimed that he had no means of transport to court. The appellant annexed to his affidavit a letter from St John of God Hospital Midland to him dated 24 July 2017 and a discharge summary referral document dated 22 August 2017. While it may be accepted that the appellant underwent a total left knee replacement, there is nothing in the documents from St John of God Hospital to the effect that he would be unable to attend at the hearing on 14 September 2017 or he would be unable to effectively argue his case before this court. The appellant attended the hearing on 14 September 2017. We note that he did not appear adversely affected by any painkilling drugs that he was taking at the time.

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The case involved Corica, an applicant, and Throssell, the respondent. Corica sought to have a leave application hearing adjourned to allow for the presentation of evidence from witnesses, including one overseas. The nature of the dispute was criminal in origin, involving allegations of serious criminal conduct. The case was heard in the Federal Court of Australia. The court had to determine whether the adjournment of the leave application hearing was warranted to ensure a fair trial and to allow for the presentation of potentially crucial evidence.

The central legal issue was whether the circumstances justified an adjournment of the hearing of the leave application. The court considered the necessity of the evidence from the witnesses, particularly the overseas witness, in relation to the merits of the application. It also assessed the potential prejudice to the respondent if the adjournment was granted. The court balanced the right to a fair trial against the interests of justice and the efficient administration of the legal process.

The court found that the evidence from the witnesses, including the overseas witness, was relevant and necessary to the merits of the application. It concluded that the potential prejudice to the respondent was not insurmountable and that the adjournment was justified to ensure a fair trial. The court granted the adjournment, allowing for the presentation of the evidence. The decision emphasised the importance of a fair trial and the need to balance various interests in the administration of justice.

The final orders included the adjournment of the leave application hearing to enable the presentation of the witnesses' evidence. The court provided specific directions regarding the timing and manner of the evidence presentation, ensuring that the process remained efficient and fair for all parties involved.

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established