Riddell v R [2022] NSWCCA 198

Riddell v R [2022] NSWCCA 198

Because Mr Riddell had filed over 4200 pages of repetitive and excessive material, allowing the application to proceed in that form would unnecessarily divert significant judicial resources and impair the Court of Criminal Appeal's ability to deal fairly with other appeals; under r 4.1 it was therefore overwhelmingly necessary in the interests of justice to return the material and require consolidated material not exceeding 200 pages, while standing over the respondent's motion.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
08 September 2022
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal; Application for Leave to Appeal Against Conviction and Application for Extension of Time / Direction Hearing; Procedural Case Management Directions
Outcome
Procedural directions made; respondent's application stood over to callover.
Legal Topics
['procedural Directions' 'case Management' 'lengthy Submissions' 'extension of Time' 'application for Leave to Appeal']
['criminal Law' 'criminal Procedure' 'appellate Procedure'] ['procedural Directions' 'case Management' 'lengthy Submissions' 'extension of Time' 'application for Leave to Appeal']

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 Appeal; Application for Leave to Appeal Against Conviction and Application for Extension of Time / Direction Hearing; Procedural Case Management Directions

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether Mr Riddell's grossly excessive filed submissions and material should be returned and replaced by consolidated submissions subject to a page limit." "Whether the respondent's application for separate determination of the extension of time should be listed immediately or stood over."]

Ratio Decidendi

Because Mr Riddell had filed over 4200 pages of repetitive and excessive material, allowing the application to proceed in that form would unnecessarily divert significant judicial resources and impair the Court of Criminal Appeal's ability to deal fairly with other appeals; under r 4.1 it was therefore overwhelmingly necessary in the interests of justice to return the material and require consolidated material not exceeding 200 pages, while standing over the respondent's motion.

Court Disposition

Procedural directions made; respondent's application stood over to callover.

Orders

  • ['Direct the Registrar to return the submissions and material in support filed by Mr Riddell to him.' 'Order Mr Riddell to file and serve the submissions and other material that he seeks to rely on, which is not to exceed 200 pages, on or before 31 January 2023.' 'List the matter before the Registrar for callover on...