Young v Jackman

The applicant, Gary Mylecharane Young, sought special leave to appeal to the High Court of Australia against a judgment of the Court of Appeal of New South Wales, which had found him guilty of contempt of court. The dispute concerned the applicant's actions in taking his son to America in 1980, which he claimed was to prevent the child from being taken to Lebanon by Mr Roumanos. The Court of Appeal had recited evidence from Mr Roumanos that he had never threatened to take the child to Lebanon, and that Mr Young may have viewed his hostility as a threat. The original judge's orders permitted the child to be taken to New Zealand.

The primary legal issue before the High Court was whether special leave to appeal should be granted. The applicant's counsel sought to argue that the Court of Appeal, sitting as a trial court, ought to have inferred that allowing the child to go to New Zealand was a small step towards taking him to Lebanon, and that this was a matter of sufficient importance to warrant review by a higher court. The Court questioned whether the case presented any matter of public or general importance, which is a prerequisite for granting special leave to appeal to the High Court.

The Chief Justice, Mason CJ, emphasised that an appeal to the High Court is only possible if special leave is granted on the ground that the case involves a matter of public or general importance. The applicant's counsel argued that given the Court of Appeal had sat as a trial court and imposed a sentence of imprisonment, there was no higher court available for review other than the High Court, and therefore, the applicant should have the opportunity for his vital orders to be reviewed. However, the Court indicated a lack of persuasive argument that the case met the threshold of public or general importance.