Hammond v Director of Public Prosecutions (NSW)

The case of Hammond v Director of Public Prosecutions (NSW) involved the appellant, who sought leave to appeal against interlocutory orders made by the Local Court. The orders in question related to the refusal of an application for separate trials. The appellant argued that the Local Court had erred in its decision and that this error should warrant the granting of leave to appeal. The Director of Public Prosecutions (NSW) opposed the application for leave to appeal, asserting that the interlocutory order was not erroneous and that there was no point of principle at stake. The legal issues before the court were whether the Local Court's order was infected by an error of law and, if so, whether the appellant had grounds to appeal.

The court considered the nature of the interlocutory order and the basis upon which it was made. It was established that the Local Court's order was indeed infected by an error of law as it failed to consider certain evidence that was relevant to the application for separate trials. The appellant conceded that the error was of law and that there was no point of principle involved. The court examined the principles governing interlocutory appeals and found that, in this instance, the error of law was significant enough to warrant appellate review. The court also noted that the concession by the appellant regarding the absence of a point of principle further supported the grant of leave to appeal.

Having determined that the interlocutory order was indeed infected by an error of law, the court granted the appellant's application for leave to appeal. The court held that the appellant had demonstrated a sufficient ground for appeal, as the error of law was material to the decision-making process. The court concluded that the interlocutory order should be reviewed, and the appellant's right to appeal was recognised. The Director of Public Prosecutions (NSW) was ordered to respond to the appeal on the merits, and the case proceeded to the appellate court for further consideration.