R v. Taylor Summary | CaseChat AU

[2010] QCA 74

COURT OF APPEAL

MUIR JA
FRYBERG J
APPLEGARTH J

CA No 27 of 2010
DC No 3089 of 2009

THE QUEEN

GARY WAYNE GEORGE TAYLOR Applicant

BRISBANE

DATE 29/03/2010

JUDGMENT

MUIR JA: In this matter unfortunately the applicant, through what appears to be an error in the Registry, wasn't given notice of the necessity to appear by video link today and no video link was arranged.

However his application for an extension of time within which to appeal is unopposed. Mr Lehane, who appears for the respondent, properly concedes that there is an arguable point. He doesn't concede that it is a point, however, which will succeed.

In those circumstances it is desirable that the matter be properly ventilated and it is likely that the applicant will obtain legal aid and hence the argument will be advanced properly when the appeal goes ahead. In those circumstances it is appropriate to extend time within which to appeal.

The order of the Court is that the time within which to appeal be extended to 30 April 2010 and obviously the application for extension of time be allowed.
...
MUIR JA: It is directed that a copy of the transcript be provided to Legal Aid and to the applicant.

In the matter of The Queen v. Gary Wayne George Taylor, the applicant sought an extension of time to appeal against his conviction and sentence. The Court of Appeal in Brisbane heard the application, which was unopposed by the respondent. The applicant had not received proper notice to appear by video link due to a registry error, but the application for an extension of time was unopposed. The court was required to decide whether the extension of time should be granted and whether there was an arguable point in the appeal. The court found that there was an arguable point and that it was desirable to ventilate the matter properly. The court considered that the applicant would likely obtain legal aid and that the appeal would be advanced properly when the appeal goes ahead. The court was satisfied that it was appropriate to extend the time within which to appeal.

The court's reasoning was based on the fact that the application for an extension of time was unopposed, and there was an arguable point in the appeal. The court found that it was desirable to ventilate the matter properly, and the applicant would likely obtain legal aid. The court was satisfied that the extension of time would not cause any prejudice to the respondent, and it was in the interests of justice to grant the extension. The court considered that the applicant would be able to properly advance the argument when the appeal goes ahead. The court concluded that it was appropriate to extend the time within which to appeal.

The court granted the applicant's application for an extension of time to appeal and ordered that the time within which to appeal be extended to 30 April 2010. The court also directed that a copy of the transcript be provided to Legal Aid and to the applicant. The court found that there was an arguable point in the appeal, and it was desirable to ventilate the matter properly. The court was satisfied that the extension of time would not cause any prejudice to the respondent, and it was in the interests of justice to grant the extension. The court considered that the applicant would be able to properly advance the argument when the appeal goes ahead. The court concluded that it was appropriate to extend the time within which to appeal.

R v. Taylor

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established