Leader v Scott

[2006] QDC 310

[2006] QDC 310

DISTRICT COURT

CIVIL JURISDICTION

JUDGE ROBIN QC

No 921 of 2006

TERRY PETER LEADER	Appellant
and
MATTHEW SCOTT	Respondent

BRISBANE

..DATE 08/08/2006

ORDER
CATCHWORDS: Registrar's reference occasioned by appellant's failure to file outline of argument required by Practice Direction - respondent's desire to have outline, as the appeal was from a complex sentencing exercise - time for filing extended to suit exigencies of the legal aid office, against possibility legal aid is approved.

HIS HONOUR:  I extend until a month from today the time within which the appellant may file the outline required by the Practice Direction.

...

This is a Registrar's reference occasioned by the appellant's failure to file the outline of argument required by the Practice Direction.  It is the appellant who is suffering from that default in that he is presently in custody.  The appeal is against a sentence pronounced on the 15th of March 2006 in Richlands Magistrates Court.

The Court's understanding today is that the main complaint is that in imposing a sentence or sentences up to two years for multiple property offences the Magistrate made that term cumulative upon a one year suspended sentence which was ordered to be served in full.  That arose from traffic matters.

The sentencing exercise seems to have been somewhat complex so that Mr Hungerford-Symes, contrary to what is often his stance, was desirous of having an outline of argument rather than proceeding without it.  The matter is obviously more complex than the usual sentence appeal from a Magistrate.

The respondent is in no particular hurry to have the matter set down, it seems, nor is the appellant.  He has taken steps to obtain legal aid.   Against the possibility that after consideration of appropriate matters legal aid might be granted, Ms Gilbert has appeared today.  She suggests that if legal aid is approved the outline could be made available within three weeks.  If legal aid is approved, she or her colleagues will be free to meet that earlier date but it seems to me convenient to allow a slightly longer period.  So, the order was to extend until a month from today the time within which the appellant may file the outline required by the Practice Direction.

‑‑‑‑‑