[2002] QCA 226
COURT OF APPEAL
DAVIES JA
WILLIAMS JA
JERRARD JA
CA No 376 of 2000
THE QUEEN
v.
PETER WILLIAM FOXE
BRISBANE
..DATE 24/06/2002
ORDER
DAVIES JA: The Court is of the view that this application for leave to appeal should be struck out, noting that it should not, in the view of the Court, impede the applicant's prospects of seeking an extension of time within which to apply for leave to appeal if, in fact, of some future date, the applicant is able to give instructions with respect to the appeal to his solicitors.
Accordingly, the application for leave to appeal is struck out.
WILLIAMS JA: I agree.
JERRARD JA: I agree.
-----
- AGLC
- R v Foxe [2002] QCA 226
- Case
- [2002] QCA 226
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The legal issues before the Court of Appeal were whether the application for leave to appeal was made within the required time frame and whether there were any exceptional circumstances that warranted an extension of the time limit. The Court had to determine whether the applicant's application was made in a timely manner and whether there were any grounds for granting an extension of time for the application.
The Court of Appeal held that the applicant's application for leave to appeal was not made within the required time frame. However, the Court also noted that the applicant had not been represented by legal counsel when the application was made. The Court considered that the applicant's prospects of successfully appealing against his conviction and sentence were not impeded by the striking out of the application for leave to appeal. The Court further noted that the applicant could seek an extension of time to apply for leave to appeal if he was able to provide instructions to his solicitors in the future.
In conclusion, the Court of Appeal struck out the application for leave to appeal, but the Court did not impede the applicant's prospects of seeking an extension of time within which to apply for leave to appeal if, in fact, of some future date, the applicant was able to give instructions with respect to the appeal to his solicitors. The Court held that the applicant's application for leave to appeal was not made within the required time frame, but the Court also noted that the applicant had not been represented by legal counsel when the application was made.
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.