Garay v The Queen

GARAY
v
THE QUEEN
[2023] HCASL 97
C4/2023

The applicant seeks special leave to appeal from a judgment of the Court of Appeal of the Australian Capital Territory Supreme Court (McCallum CJ and Collier J; Elkaim J dissenting).
The application does not raise a question of public importance concerning the proper interpretation of s 68C(2) of the Supreme Court Act 1933 (ACT), or the adequacy of reasons for the verdict of a judge in criminal proceedings. The proposed ground of appeal does not enjoy sufficient prospects of success to warrant a grant of special leave to appeal.
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

15 June 2023

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In the case of Garay v The Queen, the applicant is seeking special leave to appeal from a decision of the Court of Appeal of the Australian Capital Territory Supreme Court. The judgment in question was handed down by McCallum CJ and Collier J, with Elkaim J dissenting. The applicant's application for special leave to appeal concerns the adequacy of reasons given for a verdict in a criminal proceeding. The primary focus of the appeal is to determine whether the Court of Appeal was correct in its decision regarding the interpretation of s 68C(2) of the Supreme Court Act 1933 (ACT) and the sufficiency of reasons provided by the trial judge.

The legal issues before the court were whether the application raised a question of public importance regarding the interpretation of s 68C(2) of the Supreme Court Act 1933 (ACT) and the adequacy of reasons given for the verdict in a criminal proceeding. The court needed to decide if the application warranted special leave to appeal based on the prospects of success of the proposed grounds of appeal. The court considered the principles of special leave to appeal, which require that the application must raise a question of public importance and must have sufficient prospects of success.

The court concluded that the applicant's application did not raise a question of public importance concerning the interpretation of s 68C(2) of the Supreme Court Act 1933 (ACT) or the adequacy of reasons for the verdict in criminal proceedings. Additionally, the proposed ground of appeal did not have sufficient prospects of success to warrant a grant of special leave to appeal. The court found that the application did not meet the stringent criteria required for special leave to appeal. Consequently, the court dismissed the application for special leave to appeal.

In accordance with r 41.08.1 of the High Court Rules 2004 (Cth), the court directed the Registrar to prepare, sign, and seal an order dismissing the application. This order effectively concludes the applicant's attempt to appeal the Court of Appeal's decision and confirms that the applicant's application for special leave to appeal was not successful. The dismissal of the application signifies that the Court of Appeal's judgment stands affirmed, and the applicant's proposed grounds for appeal were not deemed strong enough to warrant further judicial review.

Continue reading Garay v The Queen

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established