R v Bryers (No 2) [2022] NSWSC 1285

R v Bryers (No 2) [2022] NSWSC 1285

Because the unresolved question of public funding for Mr Bryers' representation had reached a critical point before a long and complex trial listed for 23 January 2023, and because a Dietrich stay may be required if he remains unfunded and unrepresented through no fault of his own, the Court made urgent directions excusing him from certain pre-trial response obligations, requiring evidence about funding and any stay opposition or support, and fixing the stay application for hearing on 31 October 2022.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
23 September 2022
Procedural Posture
Criminal Prosecution; Procedural Ruling / Directions on Accused's Notice of Motion Seeking a Stay Until Legal Representation Is Provided at Public Expense
Outcome
Directions made; application for stay not finally determined.
Legal Topics
['dietrich Stay or Adjournment for Unrepresented Indigent Accused' 's 69(3) Certificate Under the Judiciary Act 1903 (cth)' 'public Funding of Criminal Defence' 'trial Listing and Pre Trial Directions' 'delay in Consideration of Legal Assistance']
['criminal Law' 'criminal Procedure' 'legal Aid and Representation' 'commonwealth Legal Financial Assistance'] ['dietrich Stay or Adjournment for Unrepresented Indigent Accused' 's 69(3) Certificate Under the Judiciary Act 1903 (cth)' 'public Funding of Criminal Defence' 'trial Listing and Pre Trial Directions' 'delay in Consideration of Legal Assistance']

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 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Procedural Posture

Criminal Prosecution; Procedural Ruling / Directions on Accused's Notice of Motion Seeking a Stay Until Legal Representation Is Provided at Public Expense

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether further directions should be made to resolve, within short time limits, whether Mr Bryers' legal representation for trial will be funded at public expense." "Whether Mr Bryers' pending application for a stay of prosecution under Dietrich v The Queen should be heard if public funding is not arranged." 'Whether Mr Bryers is indigent through no fault on his part and whether a trial without representation would be unfair or exceptional circumstances would permit it to proceed.' "The significance of restraining orders under the Proceeds of Crime Act 2002 (Cth) to Mr Bryers' ability to fund his defence privately."]

Ratio Decidendi

Because the unresolved question of public funding for Mr Bryers' representation had reached a critical point before a long and complex trial listed for 23 January 2023, and because a Dietrich stay may be required if he remains unfunded and unrepresented through no fault of his own, the Court made urgent directions excusing him from certain pre-trial response obligations, requiring evidence about funding and any stay opposition or support, and fixing the stay application for hearing on 31 October 2022.

Court Disposition

Directions made; application for stay not finally determined.

Orders

  • ['Order 2 made on 11 April 2022, requiring that by 26 September 2022 the accused respond to the notice of prosecution case and respond to any Crown proposal for agreed facts and nominate any witnesses required to be called by the Crown, shall not apply to Mark Ronald Bryers and he is excused from making any response...