Storry v Commissioner of Police

In the case of Storry v Commissioner of Police, the applicant sought an extension of time to enable the application for special leave to appeal to proceed. The appeal was related to the applicant's conviction for contempt of court and the subsequent sentence imposed by the Supreme Court of South Australia. The applicant argued that the sentence was excessive and that the appeal had a reasonable prospect of success. The Commissioner of Police and another respondent opposed the application for an extension of time and the application for special leave to appeal.

The legal issues before the court were whether an extension of time should be granted to enable the application for special leave to appeal to proceed, and whether the application for special leave to appeal had a reasonable prospect of success. The court had to consider the relevant provisions of the High Court Rules and the principles applicable to the grant of an extension of time and special leave to appeal.

The court found that the application for an extension of time should be refused because the appeal would not turn on any question of legal principle and did not enjoy any prospect of success. The court noted that the applicant had not identified any error of law or fact that would warrant the grant of special leave to appeal. The court also found that it would be futile to grant the required extension of time because the application for special leave to appeal was unlikely to succeed. The court concluded that the application for an extension of time should be dismissed and that the Registrar should draw up, sign and seal an order to that effect.

In light of the above, the application for an extension of time was dismissed, and the application for special leave to appeal was refused. The court found that the applicant's conviction and sentence were not excessive and that there was no merit in the appeal. The court also noted that the applicant had not demonstrated any grounds for granting special leave to appeal, and that the appeal would not turn on any question of legal principle. The court further found that it would be futile to grant the required extension of time because the appeal was unlikely to succeed.

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established

P.A. Keane	J.J. Edelman
16 March 2022