Gall v R [2016] NSWCCA 82

Gall v R [2016] NSWCCA 82

The application was refused because the determination under challenge was not an interlocutory judgment or order within s 5F(3)(a). The question submitted to the District Court concerned the admissibility of evidence relating to the proposed superior orders defence and an advance indication about what might be left to the jury in the summing up. Existing authority excluded both kinds of ruling from s 5F(3)(a), so the Court of Criminal Appeal lacked jurisdiction.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
06 May 2016
Procedural Posture
Application for Leave to Appeal Under S 5 F(3)(a) of the Criminal Appeal Act 1912 (nsw) Against a District Court Pre Trial Ruling in Criminal Proceedings / Court of Criminal Appeal Preliminary Jurisdictional Determination Before Trial
Outcome
Application for leave to appeal refused for want of jurisdiction.
Legal Topics
['application for Leave to Appeal' 'interlocutory Judgment or Order' 'pre Trial Ruling' 'admissibility of Evidence' 'superior Orders Defence' 'dangerous Driving Occasioning Death' 'dangerous Driving Occasioning Grievous Bodily Harm']
['criminal Law' 'criminal Procedure' 'evidence'] ['application for Leave to Appeal' 'interlocutory Judgment or Order' 'pre Trial Ruling' 'admissibility of Evidence' 'superior Orders Defence' 'dangerous Driving Occasioning Death' 'dangerous Driving Occasioning Grievous Bodily Harm']

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

Application for Leave to Appeal Under S 5 F(3)(a) of the Criminal Appeal Act 1912 (nsw) Against a District Court Pre Trial Ruling in Criminal Proceedings / Court of Criminal Appeal Preliminary Jurisdictional Determination Before Trial

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the District Court judge\'s pre-trial determination concerning the proposed defence of superior orders was an "interlocutory judgment or order" for s 5F(3)(a) of the Criminal Appeal Act 1912 (NSW).' 'Whether this Court had jurisdiction to entertain the application for leave to appeal.' 'Whether a defence of superior orders was available to charges under s 52A of the Crimes Act 1900 (NSW) in the circumstances alleged.']

Ratio Decidendi

The application was refused because the determination under challenge was not an interlocutory judgment or order within s 5F(3)(a). The question submitted to the District Court concerned the admissibility of evidence relating to the proposed superior orders defence and an advance indication about what might be left to the jury in the summing up. Existing authority excluded both kinds of ruling from s 5F(3)(a), so the Court of Criminal Appeal lacked jurisdiction.

Court Disposition

Application for leave to appeal refused for want of jurisdiction.

Orders

  • ['Application for leave to appeal refused.']