John Visser & Donna‑Marie Lewis v New South Wales Crime Commission

[2014] HCASL 192

JOHN VISSER & DONNA‑MARIE LEWIS

v

NEW SOUTH WALES CRIME COMMISSION & ANOR

[2014] HCASL 192
S120/2014

1. The applicants seek special leave to appeal against orders of the Court of Appeal of the Supreme Court of New South Wales (Basten and Meagher JJA) dismissing an application for leave to appeal against orders of the Supreme Court of New South Wales (Hidden J).

2. On 7 December 2007, the first respondent commenced proceedings against the applicants and the second respondent under the Criminal Assets Recovery Act 1990 (NSW). On 28 May 2008, those proceedings were resolved by the entry of consent orders. On 15 January 2009, the first applicant filed a motion seeking to set aside the consent orders. In a judgment delivered on 21 August 2012, Hidden J dismissed that motion.

3. The applicants and the second respondent sought leave to appeal against the decision of Hidden J.  At the hearing of the appeal, the applicants sought an adjournment to allow the second applicant to seek legal aid.  The Court of Appeal refused the application for an adjournment on the ground that there was no basis to expect legal aid to be granted, and that the application was made too late.  The Court of Appeal also refused the application for leave to appeal, on the basis that none of the proposed grounds of appeal raised an arguable case against the decision of Hidden J.

4. The applicants now seek special leave to appeal to this Court on the ground that the Court of Appeal erred in failing to grant an adjournment. As the applicants do not have legal representation, the application falls to be dealt with under r 41.10 of the High Court Rules 2004.

5. The application is brought out of time and the applicants seek an order under r 41.02.2 dispensing with the requirement to comply with the time limit in r 41.02.1.  It is not necessary to decide whether that order should be made.

6. We see no reason to doubt the correctness of the Court of Appeal's decision to refuse to grant an adjournment, or any of the other conclusions reached by the Court of Appeal.  An appeal to this Court would enjoy insufficient prospects of success to warrant a grant of special leave to appeal.  Further, in this application, no question of principle is raised for consideration by this Court and the interests of the proper administration of justice are not engaged.

7. Pursuant to r 41.10.5 we direct the Registrar to draw up, sign and seal an order dismissing the application.

K.M. Hayne
15 October 2014 S.M. Crennan