Markan v Crime and Misconduct Commission

In the case of Markan v Crime and Misconduct Commission, the appellant, Markan, sought to appeal against a decision made by the primary judge, which dismissed his application against the respondent, the Crime and Misconduct Commission. Markan argued that the primary judge lacked the necessary competence to preside over the case and contended that the respondent had failed to protect him from a so-called "lawyers' mafia." The appeal was heard in the Court of Appeal, which was tasked with determining whether the primary judge had erred in declining to provide evidence of his competence and in finding that Markan's application had no prospects of success.

The central legal issues before the Court of Appeal were whether the primary judge was correct in refusing to furnish evidence of his judicial competence and whether the judge had erred in concluding that Markan's application lacked a reasonable chance of success. Additionally, the Court had to consider whether the appellant's claims about the primary judge's competence and the legitimacy of the court system constituted valid grounds for appeal.

The Court of Appeal found that the primary judge had not erred in declining to provide evidence of his competence, as there was no legal obligation for the judge to do so in the circumstances. Furthermore, the Court determined that the primary judge's assessment of the prospects of success for Markan's application was correct, as the claims made by Markan were without merit. Consequently, the Court dismissed the appeal and ordered Markan to pay the costs associated with the appeal proceedings.