Dean Harmer (a pseudonym) v The King

Link copied
Case Copied 1 min read

Dean Harmer (a pseudonym)

v

The King

[2022] HCASL 199
M48/2022

  1. An extension of time is necessary to enable this application for special leave to appeal to proceed. The applicant seeks special leave to appeal from the decision of the Court of Appeal of the Supreme Court of Victoria. The Court of Appeal's decision is not attended by doubt. Accordingly, special leave should be refused. That being so, it would be futile to grant the required extension of time.

  2. Pursuant to r 41.08.1 of the High Court Rules 2004 (Cth), we direct the Registrar to draw up, sign and seal an order dismissing the application.

S.J. Gageler J.S. Gleeson
17 November 2022
CaseChat AU logo

Keep reading for free

Create a free CaseChat account to read Dean Harmer (a pseudonym) v The King and more:

  • Read every judgment in full
  • Ask AI and get answers linked to paragraphs
  • See how each paragraph was cited in later cases
  • Download judgments as PDF or Word
Continue with Google

One click creates your free account or signs you in.

By continuing you agree to the Terms and Privacy Policy.

Details
Case
[2022] HCASL 199
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The case of Dean Harmer (a pseudonym) v The King concerns an application for special leave to appeal, where the applicant seeks to appeal a decision of the Court of Appeal of the Supreme Court of Victoria. The applicant is Dean Harmer, who is pseudonymously named in the proceedings, and the respondent is The King, representing the state. The dispute involves the procedural aspect of appealing a decision of the Court of Appeal, specifically seeking an extension of time to enable the application for special leave to appeal to proceed.

The primary legal issue the court needed to address was whether special leave should be granted for the applicant to appeal the Court of Appeal's decision. Additionally, the court had to consider whether it was necessary to grant an extension of time for the application to proceed, given that special leave was unlikely to be granted. The court had to evaluate the merits of the appeal and the procedural implications of allowing the extension of time.

The High Court found that the Court of Appeal's decision was not attended by doubt, meaning that it was unlikely that the appeal would succeed. Therefore, special leave should be refused, and as such, it would be futile to grant the required extension of time. The High Court concluded that it was appropriate to dismiss the application for special leave and for the extension of time, as it would be an unnecessary exercise. The High Court's reasoning was based on the principle that granting special leave should only occur when there is a substantial question of law of general public importance. In this case, the High Court found that the appeal did not meet this threshold.

Accordingly, the High Court directed the Registrar to draw up, sign, and seal an order dismissing the application for special leave to appeal and the extension of time. The order was signed by S.J. Gageler and J.S. Gleeson on 17 November 2022. The dismissal of the application means that the decision of the Court of Appeal of the Supreme Court of Victoria stands, and the applicant's appeal will not proceed.

Orders

Orders of the court

Full text does not contain this section.

Background

Background to the litigation

Full text does not contain this section.

Evidence

Evidence Before The Court

Full text does not contain this section.

Decision

Reasons for decision

Full text does not contain this section.

Ratio Decidendi

Legal Principle Established

Full text does not contain this section.