R v Kern Summary | CaseChat AU

COURT OF APPEAL [1992] QCA 350

McPHERSON JA
DAVIES JA

WHITE J

CA NO. 234 OF 1992
THE QUEEN
v.

LINDSAY JOHN KERN

Applicant

BRISBANE

... DATE 28/09/92

JUDGMENT

McPHERSON JA: We have decided in this case that there is a plausible explanation for the delay in instituting an appeal and that the explanation reflects no fault on the part of the applicant.

We also consider that the matter intended to be raised on appeal
represents at least a not unarguable point. In those

circumstances, we will extend until 20 August 1992 the time

___________________________________________________________________________________

______________

4th Floor, The Law Courts, George Street, Brisbane, Q. 4000 Tel:(07)2274360

Fax:(07)2275532

within which the appellant may appeal against his conviction, that date being the date on which a notice of appeal was in fact received in the Registry of the Court.

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The case of R v Kern, which came before the Queensland Court of Appeal, involves the applicant, Lindsay John Kern, who is appealing against his conviction. The appeal was brought forward to challenge the conviction on the grounds that there was a significant delay in lodging the appeal and to address a specific point of law intended to be raised. The appeal was dismissed initially due to the delay, but the Court of Appeal reconsidered and granted an extension of time to lodge the appeal.

The legal issues the Court of Appeal was required to decide involved two main points: firstly, whether there was a plausible explanation for the delay in lodging the appeal that reflected no fault on the part of the applicant; and secondly, whether the point of law intended to be raised on appeal was at least a not unarguable point. The Court found that the delay could be plausibly explained and that there was no fault on the part of the applicant, and further determined that the intended point of law represented a legitimate issue.

In its judgment, the Court of Appeal held that the applicant's explanation for the delay in lodging the appeal was plausible and did not reflect any fault on his part. The Court also found that the matter intended to be raised on appeal constituted at least a not unarguable point. As a result, the Court granted an extension of time to allow the appellant to lodge his appeal. The extension was set to the date on which a notice of appeal was received in the Registry of the Court. The Court's decision thus allowed the appeal to proceed, addressing both the procedural delay and the substantive legal issue.

R v Kern

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established