El-Saeidy v Director of Public Prosecutions (NSW) (No 2)
Case
•
[2019] NSWCA 297
•28 November 2019
Details
AGLC
Case
Decision Date
El-Saeidy v Director of Public Prosecutions (NSW) (No 2) [2019] NSWCA 297
[2019] NSWCA 297
28 November 2019
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The applicant, El-Saeidy, sought judicial review of a decision by the Director of Public Prosecutions (NSW). The proceedings were before the Court of Appeal of New South Wales, constituted by Basten, Leeming and Payne JJA. The dispute concerned the applicant's attempt to vacate a scheduled hearing date and amend the summons during the course of the hearing itself.
The Court of Appeal was required to determine whether there was a sufficient basis to delay the hearing of the judicial review application. Furthermore, the Court had to consider the applicant's attempt to amend the summons to include a challenge to the Director's refusal to state a case to the Court of Criminal Appeal, and whether such an amendment was permissible in the circumstances.
The Court reasoned that there was no evidence presented to justify vacating the hearing date. Regarding the proposed amendment, the Court found that the summons, as sought to be amended, lacked the necessary foundation. Specifically, there was no evidence that an application had been made to the Director to state a case, nor was there any indication of a material question of law that would warrant such a challenge. Consequently, the Court dismissed the application to vacate the hearing and rejected the application to amend the summons.
The Court of Appeal was required to determine whether there was a sufficient basis to delay the hearing of the judicial review application. Furthermore, the Court had to consider the applicant's attempt to amend the summons to include a challenge to the Director's refusal to state a case to the Court of Criminal Appeal, and whether such an amendment was permissible in the circumstances.
The Court reasoned that there was no evidence presented to justify vacating the hearing date. Regarding the proposed amendment, the Court found that the summons, as sought to be amended, lacked the necessary foundation. Specifically, there was no evidence that an application had been made to the Director to state a case, nor was there any indication of a material question of law that would warrant such a challenge. Consequently, the Court dismissed the application to vacate the hearing and rejected the application to amend the summons.
Details
Key Legal Topics
Areas of Law
-
Civil Procedure
-
Administrative Law
Legal Concepts
-
Judicial Review
-
Procedural Fairness
-
Appeal
-
Statutory Construction
-
Jurisdiction
Actions
Download as PDF
Download as Word Document
Most Recent Citation
El-Saeidy v The Queen (No 2) [2021] NSWDC 548
Cases Cited
0
Statutory Material Cited
1