WILLIAMS v The Queen

Case [2022] HCASL 22


WILLIAMS

v

THE QUEEN

[2022] HCASL 22
S155/2021

  1. An extension of time is necessary to enable this application for special leave to appeal to proceed. The applicant seeks special leave to appeal from a decision of the Court of Criminal Appeal of the Supreme Court of New South Wales, which dismissed the applicant's appeal against conviction. The application raises no question of general importance. Further, the Court of Criminal Appeal's decision is not attended by doubt. Accordingly, special leave should be refused. That being so, it would be futile to grant the required extension of time.

  2. 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
17 February 2022

Continue reading WILLIAMS v The Queen

Sign in free to access the full text

Details
AGLC
WILLIAMS v The Queen [2022] HCASL 22
Case
[2022] HCASL 22
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In the case of Williams v The Queen, the applicant, Williams, sought special leave to appeal from a decision of the Court of Criminal Appeal of the Supreme Court of New South Wales, which dismissed his appeal against conviction. The primary issue before the High Court was whether to grant special leave to appeal, and if so, whether an extension of time was necessary to enable the application to proceed.

The legal issues the court was required to decide involved assessing the merits of the applicant's appeal and determining whether the application raised questions of general importance or if the decision of the Court of Criminal Appeal was attended by doubt. The court also needed to consider whether granting an extension of time would be appropriate, given the circumstances.

In its reasoning, the court found that the application did not raise questions of general importance and that the decision of the Court of Criminal Appeal was not attended by doubt. Consequently, the court concluded that special leave should be refused, making it futile to grant the required extension of time. Pursuant to rule 41.08.1 of the High Court Rules 2004 (Cth), the Registrar was directed to draw up, sign, and seal an order dismissing the application. This decision was made on 17 February 2022.

Orders

Orders of the court

Full text does not contain this section.

Background

Background to the litigation

Full text does not contain this section.

Evidence

Evidence Before The Court

Full text does not contain this section.

Decision

Reasons for decision

Full text does not contain this section.

Ratio Decidendi

Legal Principle Established

Full text does not contain this section.