WILLIAMS v BLACKLEY [2010] NSWCA 246
There is no reasonably arguable case to challenge the refusal of relief by the primary judge, as no proper legal or evidential basis was established for review or for overturning the acquittals in the summary criminal proceedings, and certiorari could not be granted in these circumstances.
- Parties
- Applicant: Colin Bruce Williams; First Respondent: Terry Arnold Blackley; Second Respondent: Andrew Henry Van Kooten
- Jurisdiction
- Australia
- Judgment Date
- 17 September 2010
- Procedural Posture
- Application for Leave to Appeal / Leave to Appeal to Court of Appeal From Supreme Court
- Outcome
- Leave to appeal refused
- Legal Topics
- Judicial Review, Acquittal, Double Jeopardy, Costs, Summary Proceedings
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Colin Bruce Williams
Applicant
Terry Arnold Blackley
First Respondent
Andrew Henry Van Kooten
Second Respondent
Procedural Posture
Application for Leave to Appeal / Leave to Appeal to Court of Appeal From Supreme Court
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether certiorari is available to quash an acquittal in summary criminal proceedings
- 2 Whether perjury or fraud in initial proceedings can justify review of an acquittal
- 3 Whether procedural errors regarding alibi evidence justified relief
Ratio Decidendi
There is no reasonably arguable case to challenge the refusal of relief by the primary judge, as no proper legal or evidential basis was established for review or for overturning the acquittals in the summary criminal proceedings, and certiorari could not be granted in these circumstances.
Court Disposition
Leave to appeal refused
Orders
- Refuse leave to appeal in each matter
- Applicant to pay respondent Mr Blackley's reasonable expenses incurred in responding to the application, including any loss of wages in attending the hearing
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