Tikomaimaleya v The Queen

TIKOMAIMALEYA
v
THE QUEEN
[2021] HCASL 157
S207/2020

The applicant seeks an extension of time of approximately three years in which to file an application for special leave to appeal from the whole of the judgment of the Court of Criminal Appeal of the Supreme Court of New South Wales (Simpson JA, Harrison and Davies JJ), dismissing his appeal against his conviction.
The proposed appeal does not raise any question of general principle and does not enjoy sufficient prospects of success to warrant a grant of special leave. Accordingly, it would be futile to grant the significant extension of time that is sought. Special leave should be refused.
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

12 August 2021

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In Tikomaimaleya v The Queen, the applicant sought an extension of time for filing an application for special leave to appeal against a conviction upheld by the Court of Criminal Appeal of the Supreme Court of New South Wales. The primary legal issue was whether the significant extension of time requested for filing the application should be granted. The Court had to assess the prospects of success of the proposed appeal and whether it raised any questions of general principle. The Court found that the appeal did not enjoy sufficient prospects of success to warrant the grant of special leave, nor did it raise any questions of general principle.

The High Court, considering the application for an extension of time, emphasised that special leave to appeal is not a matter of right but a privilege granted in the interests of justice. The Court held that the proposed appeal did not raise any question of general principle and did not have sufficient prospects of success. The Court reasoned that granting a significant extension of time in these circumstances would be futile, as the chances of success were minimal. Consequently, the application for special leave to appeal was dismissed.

In light of the above considerations, the High Court concluded that it would be inappropriate to grant the requested extension of time. The Court determined that the proposed appeal did not meet the criteria necessary for granting special leave. The Court ordered that the Registrar should draw up, sign, and seal an order dismissing the application. This decision underscores the stringent criteria that must be met for an extension of time to be granted in the context of special leave applications.

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established