Prescott v Police

The applicant, Mr Prescott, seeks recall of a judgment declining leave to appeal, before the High Court. Mr Prescott argues the Court should recall the judgment as the Crown and the Court recognised the appeal raised a question of law that was capable of bona fide argument and because of an alleged error by his counsel in submitting that leave should be granted. Mr Prescott also seeks a direction for his counsel to resubmit amended submissions. The recall application relies on r 8A of the Rules, which states the Court may, on an interlocutory application or on its own initiative, recall or reopen a judgment given in writing or orally, at any time before a formal record of it is drawn up and sealed. The Court must consider the grounds for recalling or reopening a judgment, which include an amendment to a relevant statute or regulation or a new judicial decision of relevance and high authority, counsel failing to direct the Court’s attention to a legislative provision or authoritative decision of plain relevance, or some other very special reason that justice requires that the judgment be recalled. The application for recall has been advanced by Mr Prescott on two grounds, but neither is sufficient to meet the strict criteria that justify this Court recalling one of its judgments. The Court recognised the question of law that Mr Prescott wished to pursue, notwithstanding the focus of his counsel’s submissions, but concluded that the proposed appeal did not raise questions that “outweigh[ed] the cost and delay of a further appeal”. The Court did not make a finding that Mr Prescott’s counsel erred in his submissions, nor is there any special reason that means justice requires this Court recall its leave judgment.

The recall application is dismissed.