Scrutton v The Queen

The applicants sought an extension of time and leave to appeal against their convictions. The central dispute concerned the admissibility and reliability of forensic evidence relating to bloodstains, which the applicants alleged was false, misleading, inconsistent, and flawed, and furthermore, inconsistent with the prosecution's case and their guilt. The applicants also contended that the trial judge had wrongly admitted certain relationship evidence. The matter was heard by Grant CJ, Southwood and Barr JJ.

The primary legal issues before the Court were whether the forensic evidence concerning bloodstains was improperly admitted or relied upon, whether the trial judge’s directions to the jury regarding this evidence were erroneous, and whether the admission of relationship evidence constituted a misdirection or a miscarriage of justice. The Court was also required to determine whether there were sufficient grounds to grant an extension of time for the appeal, given the applicants' failure to provide a satisfactory explanation for the delay.

The Court found that there was no satisfactory explanation for the delay in bringing the application and that no exceptional circumstances or special reasons existed to justify an extension of time. Furthermore, the Court concluded that there were no viable grounds of appeal and no manifest miscarriage of justice had occurred. Consequently, the application to extend time was dismissed, and the application for leave to appeal was also dismissed.