Rahman v Director of Public Prosecutions (NSW)

The applicant, Mr. Rahman, sought judicial review of a decision by the District Court of New South Wales, which affirmed a guilty verdict entered against him in the Local Court for an offence under section 13 of the *Crimes (Domestic and Personal Violence) Act 2007* (NSW). The primary challenges raised by Mr. Rahman concerned the District Court judge's findings of fact during the appeal.

The central legal issue before the Supreme Court of New South Wales was whether the District Court judge had committed jurisdictional error in affirming the guilty verdict. This required the Court to consider whether the judge's fact-finding process, which formed the basis of the affirmed conviction, had transgressed the limits of the court's authority.

The Court ultimately found that no jurisdictional error had been demonstrated. It reasoned that challenges to a judge's findings of fact, even if those findings were considered erroneous, do not typically amount to jurisdictional error. Jurisdictional error generally involves a court acting outside its legal powers or failing to exercise its jurisdiction, rather than making an error within the scope of its lawful authority. The Court concluded that the District Court judge had acted within their jurisdiction in making the factual determinations that led to the affirmation of the guilty verdict.

Consequently, the Court dismissed the amended summons for judicial review. It also ordered that the Conditional Release Order made by the Local Court and confirmed by the District Court continue to have effect until its original expiry date of 16 February 2023, notwithstanding any stay that might have been in place. The applicant was ordered to pay the first respondent's costs.