NICASTRI v THE SHERIFF OF NEW SOUTH WALES [1995] NSWCA 320

NICASTRI v THE SHERIFF OF NEW SOUTH WALES [1995] NSWCA 320

On the facts, the failure to grant the application was an error because the criteria of s 42(3) Bail Act were satisfied and there was no proper ground for refusal; the court should have made the order for discharge.

Parties
Claimant: Nicastri; First Opponent: The Sheriff of New South Wales
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
06 December 1995
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Orders Following Concession on Appeal
Outcome
orders made in terms of the short minutes initialled by Gleeson CJ
Legal Topics
Bail Act S 42(3), Jurisdictional Error
Criminal Law Bail Bail Act S 42(3) Jurisdictional Error

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 1 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Nicastri

Claimant

The Sheriff of New South Wales

First Opponent

Procedural Posture

Appeal / Orders Following Concession on Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether Judge Karpin erred in applying s 42(3) of the Bail Act on 18 February 1994
  2. 2 Whether the application for discharge should have been granted under s 42(3) of the Bail Act

Ratio Decidendi

On the facts, the failure to grant the application was an error because the criteria of s 42(3) Bail Act were satisfied and there was no proper ground for refusal; the court should have made the order for discharge.

Court Disposition

orders made in terms of the short minutes initialled by Gleeson CJ

Orders

  • Orders in terms of the short minutes initialled by Gleeson CJ and placed with the papers.