Salter v Director of Public Prosecutions (NSW)

The appeal concerned an interlocutory order made by R S Hulme J in the Supreme Court of New South Wales. The appellant, Salter, sought to appeal against a preliminary question of law answered by Hulme J, which was adverse to Salter's position. The Director of Public Prosecutions (NSW) argued that the answer to the preliminary question did not constitute an "order" within the meaning of s 53(3)(b) of the *Crimes (Appeal and Review) Act 2001* (NSW), and therefore was not appealable.

The central legal issue before the Court of Appeal was whether an answer given by a judge to a preliminary question of law, which determined a discrete issue in the proceedings but did not finally dispose of the entire matter, constituted an "order" for the purposes of the *Crimes (Appeal and Review) Act 2001*. This required the court to interpret the meaning of "order" in the context of interlocutory decisions and the statutory right of appeal.

The Court of Appeal held that the answer to the preliminary question was indeed an "order" within the meaning of s 53(3)(b) of the *Crimes (Appeal and Review) Act 2001*. The court reasoned that an order is a judicial pronouncement that affects the rights or interests of the parties, and an answer to a preliminary question of law, by determining a specific legal issue, has that effect. Consequently, the court found that Salter had a right to appeal the decision. The court then set aside the orders of Hulme J and dismissed the summons, with no orders as to costs, though these orders were suspended pending the respondent filing a cross-appeal.