Milton Jones (a pseudonym) v The Queen

Link copied
Case Copied 1 min read

MILTON JONES (A PSEUDONYM)

v

THE QUEEN

[2016] HCASL 7
M241/2015

  1. This application for special leave to appeal does not raise any question of principle of general importance.  It would not be in the interests of justice generally or in the particular circumstances of this case to grant special leave.

  2. The application for special leave is dismissed.

  3. Pursuant to r 41.10.5 of the High Court Rules 2004 (Cth), we direct the Registrar to draw up, sign and seal an order dismissing the application.

G.A.A. Nettle
9 March 2016
M.M. Gordon
CaseChat AU logo

Keep reading for free

Create a free CaseChat account to read Milton Jones (a pseudonym) 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
[2016] HCASL 7
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Milton Jones, applying under a pseudonym, sought special leave to appeal a decision that had been made against him. The nature of the dispute is not explicitly stated in the judgment, but it appears to relate to a criminal matter as the respondent is The Queen. The application was heard by the High Court of Australia. The court was required to decide whether the case raised any questions of principle of general importance, and whether granting special leave would be in the interests of justice generally or in the particular circumstances of this case. The High Court considered that the application for special leave did not raise any question of principle of general importance. Additionally, the Court found that it would not be in the interests of justice generally or in the particular circumstances of this case to grant special leave. The Court was satisfied that the application for special leave should be dismissed. Consequently, the application was dismissed, and the Registrar was directed to draw up, sign, and seal an order dismissing the application in accordance with the High Court Rules 2004 (Cth).

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.