Coulter v The Queen [1988] HCA 3

Coulter v The Queen [1988] HCA 3

Special leave to appeal was refused as there was no merit in the argument that s. 357 conferred a right to present oral argument, and the procedure in r. 25 of the Criminal Appeal Rules was valid. The requirement of proving specific intent to cause actual bodily harm under s. 40 was rejected, confirming Reg. v. Percali as correct.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Procedural Posture
Criminal / Application for Special Leave to Appeal
Outcome
Application for special leave to appeal refused
Legal Topics
['leave to Appeal' 'natural Justice' 'open Court Principle' 'rule Making Power' 'bodily Harm Intent']
['criminal Law' 'procedural Law'] ['leave to Appeal' 'natural Justice' 'open Court Principle' 'rule Making Power' 'bodily Harm Intent']

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 / Application for Special Leave to Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether Criminal Appeal Rules permitting private determination of applications for leave to appeal are valid under the rule-making power in the Act' 'Whether s. 357 of the Criminal Law Consolidation Act 1935 (SA) confers a right to oral argument for leave to appeal' 'Whether conviction for assault occasioning actual bodily harm under s. 40 requires proof of specific intent']

Ratio Decidendi

Special leave to appeal was refused as there was no merit in the argument that s. 357 conferred a right to present oral argument, and the procedure in r. 25 of the Criminal Appeal Rules was valid. The requirement of proving specific intent to cause actual bodily harm under s. 40 was rejected, confirming Reg. v. Percali as correct.

Court Disposition

Application for special leave to appeal refused

Orders

  • ['Special leave to appeal refused']