Langi v The King

LANGI
v
THE KING
[2024] HCASL 93
C13/2023

The applicant applies for an extension of time to file an application for special leave to appeal from a judgment of the Court of Appeal of the Supreme Court of the Australian Capital Territory (McCallum CJ, Kennett J and Refshauge AJ), dismissing an appeal against conviction by a jury in the Supreme Court of the Australian Capital Territory (Mossop J). The applicant seeks to press a single ground of appeal, arguing that the Court of Appeal erred in not concluding that the verdicts were unreasonable.
The proposed appeal raises no issue of public importance, involves the application of settled principle which are not in dispute, and is confined to the application of undisputed principle to the specific case. The proposed appeal lacks sufficient prospects of success to warrant the grant of special leave. Accordingly, it would be futile to grant the extension of time.
Special leave to appeal is refused.
Gageler CJ
Gordon J
Edelman J
Steward J
Gleeson J
Jagot J
Beech-Jones J
11 April 2024

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The applicant in this case seeks an extension of time to file an application for special leave to appeal against a judgment from the Court of Appeal of the Supreme Court of the Australian Capital Territory. The Court of Appeal dismissed an appeal against a conviction by a jury in the Supreme Court of the Australian Capital Territory. The applicant contends that the Court of Appeal erred in not finding the verdicts unreasonable and argues that the proposed appeal does not involve any issue of public importance or unsettled principle. Instead, it concerns the application of settled principles to the specific case at hand.

The legal issues before the court centred on whether the proposed appeal raised matters of public importance, involved unsettled legal principles, or had sufficient prospects of success to warrant the grant of special leave. The court had to determine if granting an extension of time would be futile given the lack of merit in the proposed grounds of appeal.

In evaluating the application, the court considered the settled nature of the legal principles involved and the absence of any significant public interest in the proposed appeal. The court concluded that the proposed appeal would not succeed as it merely applied established legal principles to the facts of the case. The court found that granting an extension of time would be futile since the proposed grounds of appeal lacked merit and had insufficient prospects of success. Therefore, the application for an extension of time to file an application for special leave was refused.

The final orders were that the application for an extension of time to file an application for special leave to appeal was refused.

Keep reading for free

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established