Franklin v Director of Public Prosecutions (NSW)

The applicant, Franklin, sought to appeal to the Court of Criminal Appeal against a decision of the District Court of New South Wales. The dispute concerned the District Court judge's refusal to state a case to the Court of Criminal Appeal, following an earlier appeal by Franklin from the Local Court. The core of the matter was whether this refusal constituted a jurisdictional error, which would be an exception to a privative clause precluding judicial review.

The Court of Criminal Appeal was required to determine whether the District Court judge's repeated refusal to state a case, based on the reasoning that a favourable answer to the question of law would not alter the outcome of the District Court appeal, amounted to a jurisdictional error. This involved considering the scope of the judge's discretion under section 5B of the *Criminal Appeal Act 1912* (NSW) and the principles of procedural fairness, specifically in relation to apprehended bias.

The Court held that the judge's refusal did not constitute a jurisdictional error. It reasoned that the judge was entitled to consider whether the determination of the question of law would have any practical effect on the outcome of the appeal before him. The judge's conclusion that it would not, even if arguably erroneous in its assessment of the practical effect, did not amount to a failure to exercise his jurisdiction or an error of law going to jurisdiction. The Court further found that the judge's reasons did not give rise to an apprehension of bias.

Consequently, the summons was dismissed with costs.