Leiper v R [2018] NSWCCA 117
The applicant did not demonstrate that a conditional stay was necessary to prevent unfairness; the case for a stay was weak given that all materials had been disclosed, the logs provided significant guidance, and the applicant had opportunity to review the recordings. The likely result of allowing the appeal—a further adjournment of an already much-delayed trial—outweighed any weak prospects of substantive relief. Leave to appeal was therefore refused.
- Jurisdiction
- Australia
- Judgment Date
- 08 June 2018
- Procedural Posture
- Criminal Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal Interlocutory Order
- Outcome
- Leave to appeal is refused
- Legal Topics
- ['stay of Proceedings' 'disclosure' 'fair Trial' 'legal Aid Funding']
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal Interlocutory Order
Legal Issues
- 1 ['Whether a conditional stay of proceedings should be granted pending provision of transcripts of covert audio recordings by the Crown' 'Whether failure to provide such transcripts results in unfairness to the accused warranting a stay' "Whether leave should be granted to appeal the District Court's refusal to stay the proceedings"]
Ratio Decidendi
The applicant did not demonstrate that a conditional stay was necessary to prevent unfairness; the case for a stay was weak given that all materials had been disclosed, the logs provided significant guidance, and the applicant had opportunity to review the recordings. The likely result of allowing the appeal—a further adjournment of an already much-delayed trial—outweighed any weak prospects of substantive relief. Leave to appeal was therefore refused.
Court Disposition
Leave to appeal is refused
Orders
- ['Leave to appeal from the interlocutory order refusing a stay is 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