Slaveski v The Queen

The appeal before the court was brought by Slaveski, who had been convicted of contempt of court. The conviction stemmed from Slaveski's conduct during a trial in which he engaged in abusive behaviour, made allegations of impropriety and corruption against the Court and the presiding judge, and threatened the judge. Slaveski challenged his conviction on various grounds, including the trial judge's refusal to grant an adjournment for him to obtain legal representation, and the trial judge's alleged bias. However, Slaveski later abandoned the appeal against his conviction.

Slaveski also appealed against the sentence imposed for the contempt charge, arguing that the trial judge failed to take sufficient account of his apologies and his mental illness, and that the sentence of two months’ imprisonment was manifestly excessive. He further contended that the trial judge erred in imposing a fixed term of imprisonment in default of payment of costs. The appeal against the sentence was allowed in part, and Slaveski was resentenced to two months’ imprisonment, with an order to pay indemnity costs.

Slaveski further appealed against the trial judge's refusal to recuse himself on the basis of apprehended bias. The allegations of bias included the trial judge working from altered documents, having the goal of imprisoning Slaveski, and 'covering up' interference in evidence. The appeal against recusal was dismissed, as there was no basis for the allegations of bias.

Lastly, Slaveski appealed against the refusal of the trial judge to grant an adjournment of the trial, claiming that the trial judge had erred in not granting an adjournment where counsel and solicitors had withdrawn and legal aid had been withdrawn during the trial through his actions. The appeal was dismissed, as there was no error and no denial of natural justice.