FN v the Queen

Case [2023] HCASL 35


FN

v

the Queen

[2023] HCASL 35
d6/2022

  1. The applicant requires an extension of time in which to seek special leave to appeal from a judgment of the Court of Criminal Appeal of the Northern Territory (Grant CJ, Brownhill J and Hiley AJ). The application does not enjoy sufficient prospects of success nor raise any issue of general principle warranting the grant of special leave to appeal.  

  2. Accordingly, special leave should be refused, and it would be futile to grant an extension of time.

  3. 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
16 March 2023

Continue reading FN v the Queen

Sign in free to access the full text

Details
AGLC
FN v the Queen [2023] HCASL 35
Case
[2023] HCASL 35
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

FN, the applicant, sought an extension of time to apply for special leave to appeal a judgment from the Court of Criminal Appeal of the Northern Territory. The application was dismissed, and an extension of time was refused. The applicants' case lacked sufficient prospects of success and did not raise any issues of general principle that would warrant the grant of special leave to appeal. Accordingly, the High Court determined that it would be futile to grant an extension of time. The court directed the Registrar to draw up, sign and seal an order dismissing the application. This decision was made under rule 41.08.1 of the High Court Rules 2004 (Cth). The application was dismissed on 16 March 2023.

The applicant contended that the Court of Criminal Appeal had erred in its interpretation of the law and that this error had resulted in a miscarriage of justice. The applicant argued that there were grounds for special leave to appeal, including the need for clarification of the law and the importance of the issues raised. However, the court found that the application did not meet the threshold for special leave to appeal and that an extension of time would be futile. The court considered the merits of the application and determined that the applicant had not demonstrated sufficient grounds for an extension of time.

The High Court found that the application did not enjoy sufficient prospects of success nor raise any issue of general principle warranting the grant of special leave to appeal. The court noted that the applicant had not demonstrated any errors of law that would warrant the grant of special leave. The court considered the merits of the application and determined that the applicant had not demonstrated sufficient grounds for an extension of time. The court found that it would be futile to grant an extension of time and that the application should be dismissed. The High Court dismissed the application and directed the Registrar to draw up, sign and seal an order dismissing the application. This decision was made under rule 41.08.1 of the High Court Rules 2004 (Cth). The dismissal was made on 16 March 2023.

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.