The King v Batak

The High Court of Australia considered an application for special leave to appeal in a criminal matter involving the respondent, Mr Batak. The Crown sought to set aside an order for a new trial made by the New South Wales Court of Criminal Appeal and dismiss Mr Batak's appeal against his conviction. The central dispute concerned whether an accessory before the fact to constructive murder, where the foundational offence was attempted robbery armed with a dangerous weapon, was an offence known to the law.

The legal issues before the High Court included whether special leave to appeal should be revoked, whether the interests of justice warranted such revocation, and whether the case had ceased to be an appropriate vehicle for the important question of law it raised. The Crown's argument that accessory before the fact to constructive murder was an offence known to law, and its proposed reformulation of the mental element for this offence, were key to the Court's consideration of these issues.

A majority of the High Court revoked special leave to appeal and refused leave to file an amended notice of appeal. This decision was based on the conclusion that the manner in which the appeal would be conducted meant the case was no longer an appropriate vehicle for the question of law it raised. The Crown's concession that if its submissions were accepted, the order for a new trial should be affirmed, and its attempt to change its position on the mental state for accessory to constructive murder, contributed to this conclusion. One judge dissented, considering special leave should not have been revoked and that the Court had jurisdiction to make the orders sought by the Crown.