Dacich v Director of Public Prosecutions (No 2)

The applicant, Mr Dacich, sought judicial review of a judgment of the District Court of New South Wales, which had dismissed his appeal against a sentence imposed by the Local Court. The Director of Public Prosecutions (NSW) was the respondent. The core of the dispute concerned alleged jurisdictional error and procedural unfairness in the District Court's handling of Mr Dacich's appeal.

The legal issues before the Court of Appeal were whether the District Court had committed jurisdictional error in its conduct of Mr Dacich's appeal, specifically in relation to the refusal of an adjournment application and the alleged incompetence of his legal representative. The court also considered whether the District Court had failed to properly consider pre-sentence custody in accordance with the *Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999* (NSW). A further issue was whether the District Court had adequately addressed the applicant's application for review of a refusal of legal aid.

The Court of Appeal found that the District Court had not erred in its refusal of the adjournment application, nor had it been procedurally unfair in its handling of the appeal. The court determined that the applicant's legal representative had not been incompetent in a manner that would constitute jurisdictional error, particularly in relation to the failure to obtain a psychologist's report for a s 32 application under the *Mental Health (Forensic Provisions) Act 1990* (NSW). The court also concluded that the District Court had properly considered the pre-sentence custody. Consequently, the summons for judicial review was dismissed. The applicant was ordered to pay the costs of the Director of Public Prosecutions, and it was directed that the sentence imposed in the District Court should recommence upon his return to custody.