Sigalla v The Queen

Link copied
Case Copied 1 min read

SIGALLA

v

The QUEEN

[2022] HCASL 166
S73/2022

  1. The applicant seeks special leave to appeal from a decision of the Court of Criminal Appeal of the Supreme Court of New South Wales.

  2. An extension of time is necessary to enable this application to proceed. As to the first proposed ground of appeal, the decision of the Court of Criminal Appeal is plainly correct. The second proposed ground of appeal is an unsuitable vehicle for the grant of special leave. Accordingly, special leave should be refused. That being so, it would be futile to grant the required extension of time.

  3. Pursuant to r 41.08.1 of the High Court Rules 2004 (Cth), we direct the Registrar to draw up, sign and seal an order dismissing the application.

P.A. Keane J.S. Gleeson
19 September 2022
CaseChat AU logo

Keep reading for free

Create a free CaseChat account to read Sigalla v The Queen and more:

  • Read every judgment in full
  • Ask AI and get answers linked to paragraphs
  • See how each paragraph was cited in later cases
  • Download judgments as PDF or Word
Continue with Google

One click creates your free account or signs you in.

By continuing you agree to the Terms and Privacy Policy.

Details
Case
[2022] HCASL 166
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Sigalla v The Queen was a case heard by the High Court of Australia. The applicant in this case sought special leave to appeal from a decision made by the Court of Criminal Appeal of the Supreme Court of New South Wales. The primary focus of this appeal was to challenge the decision made by the Court of Criminal Appeal, and the applicant requested an extension of time to enable the application to proceed. The legal issues that the Court had to decide revolved around whether the decision made by the Court of Criminal Appeal was correct and if the second proposed ground of appeal was an appropriate vehicle for the grant of special leave.

The High Court examined the first proposed ground of appeal, which concerned the decision of the Court of Criminal Appeal. The Court concluded that the decision was plainly correct and therefore did not warrant any further appeal. The second proposed ground of appeal was also reviewed, and the Court found it to be an unsuitable vehicle for the grant of special leave. Consequently, the High Court deemed it appropriate to refuse special leave and deemed it futile to grant the required extension of time.

Following the High Court's examination and decision on the matter, it directed the Registrar to draw up, sign, and seal an order dismissing the application. The order was made on 19 September 2022, and the application for special leave to appeal was dismissed. This decision was based on the Court's findings that the decision made by the Court of Criminal Appeal was correct and that the second proposed ground of appeal was unsuitable for the grant of special leave.

Orders

Orders of the court

Full text does not contain this section.

Background

Background to the litigation

Full text does not contain this section.

Evidence

Evidence Before The Court

Full text does not contain this section.

Decision

Reasons for decision

Full text does not contain this section.

Ratio Decidendi

Legal Principle Established

Full text does not contain this section.