McKenzie v The Queen

Link copied
Case Copied 1 min read

MCKENZIE

v

THE QUEEN

[2020] HCASL 171
B23/2020

  1. This is an application for special leave to appeal from a judgment of the Court of Appeal of the Supreme Court of Queensland (Morrison and Philippides JJA, Mullins AJA). An extension of time is required for this application to proceed. The application for special leave to appeal does not identify any reason to doubt the correctness of the decision of the Court of Appeal. It would therefore be futile to grant an extension of time. The application should be dismissed.

  2. Pursuant to r 41.08.1 of the High Court Rules 2004 (Cth), we direct the Registrar to draw up, sign and seal an order dismissing the application.

M.M Gordon J.J Edelman
2 September 2020
CaseChat AU logo

Keep reading for free

Create a free CaseChat account to read McKenzie v The Queen and more:

  • Read every judgment in full
  • Ask AI and get answers linked to paragraphs
  • See how each paragraph was cited in later cases
  • Download judgments as PDF or Word
Continue with Google

One click creates your free account or signs you in.

By continuing you agree to the Terms and Privacy Policy.

Details
Case
[2020] HCASL 171
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The parties involved in this case are McKenzie, the appellant, and The Queen, the respondent. The dispute concerns the dismissal of an application for special leave to appeal against a decision of the Court of Appeal of the Supreme Court of Queensland. The matter was brought before the High Court of Australia, which was required to decide whether to grant an extension of time for the application to proceed.

The primary legal issue before the court was whether to allow an extension of time for the application for special leave to appeal to proceed, given that the application did not identify any reason to doubt the correctness of the Court of Appeal's decision. The court was required to consider the merits of the application and determine if there were any compelling reasons to grant the extension of time.

The court found that there were no compelling reasons to doubt the correctness of the Court of Appeal's decision, and therefore, the application for special leave to appeal was unlikely to succeed. As such, the court considered it futile to grant an extension of time for the application to proceed. The High Court ultimately dismissed the application for special leave to appeal and directed the Registrar to draw up, sign, and seal an order to that effect.

This case highlights the importance of demonstrating compelling reasons when applying for an extension of time in appeals to the High Court of Australia. The court is unlikely to grant such an extension if the application does not identify any reason to doubt the correctness of the Court of Appeal's decision.

Orders

Orders of the court

Full text does not contain this section.

Background

Background to the litigation

Full text does not contain this section.

Evidence

Evidence Before The Court

Full text does not contain this section.

Decision

Reasons for decision

Full text does not contain this section.

Ratio Decidendi

Legal Principle Established

Full text does not contain this section.