COURT OF APPEAL
WILLIAMS JA
JERRARD JA
CHESTERMAN J
CA No 29 of 2004
CA No 34 of 2004
THE QUEEN
v.
GS Applicant
BRISBANE
..DATE 21/05/2004
JUDGMENT
WILLIAMS JA: On the respondent not opposing the applications, the Court will make all necessary extensions of time to enable the appeal and applications currently before the Court to be prosecuted.
-----
Details
- AGLC
- R v GS [2004] QCA 173
- Case
- [2004] QCA 173
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The case of R v GS is an appeal brought before the Queensland Court of Appeal. The applicant, GS, is appealing against a decision made by a lower court. The appeal pertains to the legal proceedings and outcomes associated with the applicant's case, which remains unspecified in the given text. The Court of Appeal comprises three judges: Williams JA, Jerram JA, and Chesterman JCA.
The primary legal issues before the Court were not explicitly detailed in the text. However, it is evident that the Court had to consider the applications made by the applicant, GS, which pertain to the prosecution of the appeal and related matters. The Court was tasked with deciding whether to grant extensions of time for the prosecution of the appeal and applications, as the respondent did not oppose these applications.
In its judgment, the Court noted that the respondent did not oppose the applications made by the applicant, GS. Consequently, the Court granted all necessary extensions of time to enable the appeal and applications to proceed. The Court's decision was based on the absence of opposition from the respondent and the applicant's need for additional time to effectively prosecute the appeal and related matters. The Court's reasoning focused on the procedural aspects of the case, ensuring that the applicant had sufficient time to prepare and present their appeal before the Court of Appeal.
The primary legal issues before the Court were not explicitly detailed in the text. However, it is evident that the Court had to consider the applications made by the applicant, GS, which pertain to the prosecution of the appeal and related matters. The Court was tasked with deciding whether to grant extensions of time for the prosecution of the appeal and applications, as the respondent did not oppose these applications.
In its judgment, the Court noted that the respondent did not oppose the applications made by the applicant, GS. Consequently, the Court granted all necessary extensions of time to enable the appeal and applications to proceed. The Court's decision was based on the absence of opposition from the respondent and the applicant's need for additional time to effectively prosecute the appeal and related matters. The Court's reasoning focused on the procedural aspects of the case, ensuring that the applicant had sufficient time to prepare and present their appeal before the Court of Appeal.
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.