Legal Research
Cases
R v Beveridge

R v Beveridge

Case [1992] QCA 235

Appeal

Limitation Periods

Criminal Law

No judgment structure available for this case.

Type to search within this case.

COURT OF APPEAL [1992] QCA 235

FITZGERALD P McPHERSON JA PINCUS JA

CA No 102/92

THE QUEEN

BERNARD THOMAS BEVERIDGE

BRISBANE

.. DATE 13/7/92

JUDGMENT

THE PRESIDENT: In all the circumstances including the

difficulties on the one hand with respect to the second

affidavit taking the respondent by surprise and on the other

hand the applicant not himself asserting its full accuracy,

the Court is disposed not to embark upon a consideration of

the merits but will grant an extension of time within which

the applicant may appeal to the date upon which the notice of

appeal was filed in this Court.

_____

Details

AGLC: R v Beveridge [1992] QCA 235
Case: [1992] QCA 235
Decision Date: 13/07/1992

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The case of R v Beveridge involves the respondent, Bernard Thomas Beveridge, who was appealing a decision made in a lower court. The appeal was brought before the Court of Appeal in Brisbane, with the matter being heard by Fitzgerald P, McPherson JA, and Pincus JA. The respondent sought an extension of time to appeal a decision that was made against him, contending that the original time frame provided for filing the appeal was inadequate.

The central legal issue before the court was whether to grant the respondent an extension of time to file his appeal, given the circumstances that surrounded the case. The respondent argued that the second affidavit presented to him was unexpected and contributed to the delay in filing his appeal. Conversely, the respondent himself had not asserted the full accuracy of the affidavit, which potentially undermined his case for an extension.

The Court of Appeal considered the difficulties faced by the respondent, including the unexpected nature of the second affidavit and the respondent's failure to assert its full accuracy. The court decided that, in light of these circumstances, it was appropriate to grant an extension of time for the respondent to file his appeal. The extension was granted to the date on which the notice of appeal was originally filed in the Court of Appeal. This decision reflected a balance between the procedural fairness owed to the respondent and the need to maintain the integrity of the court's processes.

Orders