Sobye v Levy

The applicant, Sobye, sought special leave to appeal to the High Court of Australia from a decision of the Supreme Court of New South Wales. The Supreme Court had, by majority, granted a prohibition against the conviction of the respondent, Levy, who had been charged with selling a ticket in a lottery, specifically a Limerick competition, contrary to the *Gaming and Betting Act 1906* and the *Police Offences (Amendment) Act 1908*.

The legal issue before the High Court was whether the Limerick competition constituted a lottery within the meaning of the relevant legislation. This involved determining whether the competition, which required participants to supply the last line of a Limerick and offered prizes based on the decision of a committee appointed by the proprietor, was a distribution of money by chance or whether the element of skill or judgment rendered it something other than a lottery.

A majority of the High Court, comprising Griffith C.J., Barton and O'Connor JJ., held that the question of whether the competition was a lottery was a question of fact. They reasoned that while a competition might involve an element of skill, it could still be a lottery if the transaction was ultimately fraudulent or if the distribution of prizes was by mere chance. However, as the determination of whether the scheme was a lottery depended on the specific facts of the case, and the Supreme Court had already made a finding on those facts, special leave to appeal on a question of fact would not be granted. Isaacs J., dissenting, considered the facts to be undisputed and believed the Supreme Court's decision was erroneous in law, arguing that the competition was a mere contrivance for the distribution of money by chance, despite the appearance of a literary competition, and therefore special leave should be granted.

The application for special leave to appeal was refused.