Legal Research
Cases
ZBJ v The King

ZBJ v The King

Case [2025] NSWCCA 105 14 July 2025

No judgment structure available for this case.

Type to search within this case.

Court of Criminal Appeal

Supreme Court

New South Wales

Amendment notes

Medium Neutral Citation: ZBJ v R [2025] NSWCCA 105
Hearing dates: 16 June 2025
Date of orders: 14 July 2025
Decision date: 14 July 2025
Before: Garling J;
Wright J;
Yehia J
Decision:
(1) Pursuant to r 3.5(5) of the Supreme Court (Criminal Appeal) Rules 2021 (NSW), the applicant has leave to make his appeal and his application for leave to appeal in this matter out of time.
(2) The applicant’s appeal, application for leave to appeal and his release application are listed before the Registrar on 24 July 2025 at 9:00am.

Catchwords:
CRIME – appeals – appeal and application for leave to appeal – notice of appeal filed out of time – where a proposed ground of appeal raises a constitutional issue so as to attract the operation of s 78B of the Judiciary Act 1903 (Cth) – prior to leave being granted to make appeal or application for leave to appeal no “cause pending” – whether appropriate to deal with application for extension of time for appeal before hearing the substantive appeal where s 78B notices would be required – appropriate to hear application for leave to make the appeal out of time before hearing the appeal
CRIME – appeals – appeal and application for leave to appeal – notice of appeal filed out of time – release application under s 49 of the Bail Act 2013 (NSW) – proposed conviction and sentence appeal – no “proceedings…pending” before the Court – no jurisdiction to hear application before leave to appeal out of time granted – appropriate to hear application for leave to make the appeal out of time before hearing the release application
CRIME – appeals – appeal and application for leave to appeal – notice of appeal filed out of time – where there is satisfactory explanation for delay – where proposed grounds of appeal sufficiently arguable – no relevant prejudice to proposed respondent if leave to appeal granted – where leave to appeal is in the interests of justice – application to make appeal and leave for appeal out of time granted

Legislation Cited:
Commonwealth Constitution, s 80
Bail Act 2013 (NSW), ss 4, 48, 49, 59, 61
Crimes Act 1900 (NSW), s 66EA
Criminal Appeal Act 1912 (NSW), s 10
Interpretation Act 1987 (NSW), s 12
Judiciary Act 1903 (Cth), ss 2, 78B
Supreme Court (Criminal Appeal) Rules 2021 (NSW), rr, 3.1, 3.5

Cases Cited:
AK v R [2025] NSWCCA 74
Forge v Australian Securities and Investments Commission (2006) 228 CLR 45; [2006] HCA 44
Gould v R [2023] NSWCCA 103; 308 A Crim R 14
Kable v Director of Public Prosecutions (NSW) (1996) 189 CLR 51; [1996] HCA 24
Morton (a pseudonym) v The King [2025] SASCA 29 R v CAZ [2012] 1 Qd R 440; [2011] QCA 231

Category: Procedural rulings
Parties: ZBJ (Applicant)
Rex (Respondent)
Representation:
Applicant (self-represented)

Counsel:
B Costello (Respondent)
Solicitors:
Solicitor for Public Prosecutions (NSW)…

Grounds of appeal

[14] The appellant contends that the primary judge erred in finding that the respondent had discharged the onus of establishing the matters required under the relevant provision.

[15] It was submitted that his Honour failed to give adequate weight to the evidence of the second witness, and that the findings of fact were not reasonably open on the material before the Court.

[16] The respondent, for its part, submits that no error is disclosed, and that the conclusions reached were well within the range of outcomes available to the primary judge.

Consideration

[17] It is convenient to deal first with the question of construction, as the resolution of that issue informs the remaining grounds advanced by the appellant.

[18] For the reasons that follow, we are of the view that the appeal should be allowed in part and the matter remitted for further determination.

Continue reading ZBJ v The King

Details

AGLC: ZBJ v The King [2025] NSWCCA 105
Case: [2025] NSWCCA 105
Decision Date: 14 July 2025

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The decision in ZBJ v The King involved the appellant, ZBJ, who sought leave to appeal against his conviction and sentence out of time, and subsequently applied for an extension of time for a release application under section 49 of the Bail Act 2013 (NSW). The Court of Appeal was tasked with determining whether it was appropriate to consider the application for an extension of time for the release application before granting leave to make the appeal out of time, as well as whether it had jurisdiction to hear the release application before leave to appeal out of time was granted. The High Court further considered whether the application for leave to appeal out of time should be heard before the substantive appeal, especially in light of the constitutional issue raised in the proposed grounds of appeal.

The legal issues before the court were centered around the timing of the appeal and the procedural requirements for making an appeal out of time. Specifically, the court had to determine whether it was appropriate to hear the application for an extension of time for the release application before granting leave to make the appeal out of time, and whether it had jurisdiction to hear the release application before such leave was granted. Additionally, the court had to consider whether the application for leave to appeal out of time should be heard before the substantive appeal, given the constitutional issue raised in the proposed grounds of appeal.

The court found that it was appropriate to hear the application for leave to make the appeal out of time before hearing the substantive appeal, as the proposed grounds of appeal raised a constitutional issue that would require the respondent to be given notice under section 78B of the Judiciary Act 1903 (Cth). The court held that it did not have jurisdiction to hear the release application before leave to appeal out of time was granted, as there were no "proceedings...pending" before the Court at that point. The court concluded that the application for leave to appeal out of time should be heard before the substantive appeal, as it was in the interests of justice to do so. The court further found that there was a satisfactory explanation for the delay in filing the notice of appeal, the proposed grounds of appeal were sufficiently arguable, and there would be no relevant prejudice to the proposed respondent if leave to appeal was granted. Consequently, the application for leave to make the appeal and leave for appeal out of time was granted.

The final orders of the court were that the application for leave to make the appeal and leave for appeal out of time was granted, and the release application under section 49 of the Bail Act 2013 (NSW) was to be heard after the grant of leave to appeal out of time.

Orders