R v Sparos [2018] NSWSC 854

R v Sparos [2018] NSWSC 854

The court found Mr Sparos' decision to dismiss his senior counsel was gratuitous and unreasonable, based on disagreements about trial tactics and insignificant differences, without evidence of incompetence or necessity, and thus did not warrant discharging the jury or a four-week adjournment.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
07 June 2018
Procedural Posture
Criminal / Interlocutory Application During Trial
Outcome
Application to discharge the jury or alternatively to adjourn proceedings is refused.
Legal Topics
['withdrawal of Counsel' 'adjournment' 'discharge of Jury' 'reasonableness of Dismissal of Counsel']
['criminal Law' 'criminal Procedure'] ['withdrawal of Counsel' 'adjournment' 'discharge of Jury' 'reasonableness of Dismissal of Counsel']

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 / Interlocutory Application During Trial

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether the accused's withdrawal of counsel's instructions was reasonable" 'Whether the jury should be discharged or an adjournment should be granted following the withdrawal' 'The appropriate consequences for withdrawal of counsel by accused']

Ratio Decidendi

The court found Mr Sparos' decision to dismiss his senior counsel was gratuitous and unreasonable, based on disagreements about trial tactics and insignificant differences, without evidence of incompetence or necessity, and thus did not warrant discharging the jury or a four-week adjournment.

Court Disposition

Application to discharge the jury or alternatively to adjourn proceedings is refused.

Orders

  • ["Accused's application to discharge the jury is refused." "Accused's application for a four-week adjournment is refused."]