R v Dawson Summary | CaseChat AU

COURT OF APPEAL [1992] QCA 325

MACROSSAN CJ
DAVIES JA

AMBROSE J

CA NO. 211 OF 1992

THE QUEEN

ROBERT NORMAN DAWSON

Applicant

BRISBANE

... DATE 09/09/92

JUDGMENT

THE CHIEF JUSTICE: Mr. Dawson, the Court is disposed to allow the adjournment that you seek. We will give you the adjournment that you seek. We will adjourn the hearing for one month, that will be a minumum period. The precise date that it is fixed you will be notified of by the Court but it will not be less than the month you ask for.

That is to allow you an opportunity to get legal assistance, privately arrange for that. You should understand that if you are not able to arrange that - and you may not be able to, we don't know what your resources are of course - if you are unable to arrange it, you will have to be prepared to appear on your own behalf when the appeal comes on again, which will be at least one month from today. So you have ample warning of that. If you cannot get anyone to appear for you, you will have to be in a position where you make your submissions on your own behalf on that date.

APPLICANT: Yes, Your Honour.

THE CHIEF JUSTICE: All right. Well, we will adjourn it on that basis.

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The matter under consideration in the Court of Appeal is an application by Robert Norman Dawson to have his appeal against conviction and sentence heard by a full bench. The original trial was conducted in the Supreme Court of Queensland where Dawson was found guilty of certain criminal offences. His appeal to the Court of Appeal was initially heard by a single judge, but he now seeks an adjournment to allow for representation by counsel and potentially for a full bench hearing.

The legal issues before the Court of Appeal pertain to the granting of an adjournment in the context of an ongoing appeal. The Court must determine whether the applicant has demonstrated sufficient grounds to warrant an adjournment, particularly given the potential impact on the administration of justice and the applicant's right to be heard. The Court also had to consider the appropriate duration for the adjournment and whether the applicant could manage without legal representation.

The Court of Appeal, led by Macrossan CJ, acknowledged the applicant's request for an adjournment to allow him to secure legal representation. The Court emphasised the importance of the applicant being prepared to present his case without counsel if he could not secure legal assistance within the specified timeframe. The Court granted the adjournment for a minimum period of one month to provide the applicant with ample time to arrange for representation. However, the Court made it clear that if Dawson could not secure legal representation, he would need to be prepared to proceed on his own behalf.

In summary, the Court of Appeal granted Dawson's application for an adjournment to allow him to secure legal representation, setting a minimum adjournment period of one month. The Court underscored the necessity for the applicant to be ready to present his case independently if he failed to obtain counsel within the specified timeframe.

R v Dawson

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established