Barton-Smith v Railton [1918] HCA 78
Special leave to appeal should be refused because it is not the practice to grant such leave in cases involving discharge of an accused purely on arguable questions of technical guilt or on mixed law and fact open to honest difference.
- Parties
- Applicant: Biron-Smith; Respondents: Ailton and others
- Jurisdiction
- Australia
- Judgment Date
- 17 December 1918
- Procedural Posture
- Application for Special Leave to Appeal / Decision of High Court on Special Leave to Appeal From Supreme Court of New South Wales
- Outcome
- special leave to appeal refused
- Legal Topics
- Disqualification of Aldermen, Interest in Council Agreements, Penalty for Disqualification, Free Passes as Gifts to Aldermen
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Biron-Smith
Applicant
Ailton and others
Respondents
Procedural Posture
Application for Special Leave to Appeal / Decision of High Court on Special Leave to Appeal From Supreme Court of New South Wales
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the acceptance and use of free travel passes from a ferry company leasing council land made the aldermen 'interested' in the lease under sec. 70 of the Local Government Act 1906 (NSW) and thus disqualified them from office.
Ratio Decidendi
Special leave to appeal should be refused because it is not the practice to grant such leave in cases involving discharge of an accused purely on arguable questions of technical guilt or on mixed law and fact open to honest difference.
Court Disposition
special leave to appeal refused
Orders
- Special leave to appeal from the Supreme Court of New South Wales (Sly J.) refused.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment