SCHOKMAN v DPP & ANOR [2001] NSWCA 334

SCHOKMAN v DPP & ANOR [2001] NSWCA 334

The summons was dismissed because the Court of Appeal had no criminal appellate jurisdiction to extend time to appeal from the District Court and no statutory power to reinstate the claimant's licences. Although residual judicial review may be available notwithstanding s 146 of the Justices Act 1902, the District...

Source-derived case information.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
30 August 2001
Procedural Posture
Summons Seeking Relief in the Nature of Certiorari, Reinstatement of Licences, and Leave to Extend Time to Appeal From a District Court All Grounds Appeal / Court of Appeal Hearing of Summons, Including Refused Adjournment Request
Outcome
Summons dismissed with costs.
Legal Topics
['certiorari' 'jurisdictional Error' 'procedural Fairness' 'district Court All Grounds Appeal' 'refusal to Submit to Breath Analysis' 'driver Licence Disqualification']
['administrative Law' 'criminal Law' 'traffic Law' 'appellate Procedure'] ['certiorari' 'jurisdictional Error' 'procedural Fairness' 'district Court All Grounds Appeal' 'refusal to Submit to Breath Analysis' 'driver Licence Disqualification']

Source-derived case record

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 1 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Procedural Posture

Summons Seeking Relief in the Nature of Certiorari, Reinstatement of Licences, and Leave to Extend Time to Appeal From a District Court All Grounds Appeal / Court of Appeal Hearing of Summons, Including Refused Adjournment Request

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the Court of Appeal had jurisdiction to grant leave to extend time to appeal in a criminal matter from the District Court.' "Whether the Court of Appeal had power to reinstate the claimant's driving licence or taxi licence." 'Whether s 146 of the Justices Act 1902 barred removal or quashing of the District Court adjudication except for residual review for jurisdictional error or procedural unfairness.' "Whether the District Court made a jurisdictional error or denied procedural fairness in dismissing the claimant's all grounds appeal." 'Whether an adjournment should be granted to allow the claimant to seek further legal aid.']

Ratio Decidendi

The summons was dismissed because the Court of Appeal had no criminal appellate jurisdiction to extend time to appeal from the District Court and no statutory power to reinstate the claimant's licences. Although residual judicial review may be available notwithstanding s 146 of the Justices Act 1902, the District Court judge dealt with an all grounds appeal within jurisdiction, addressed the correct legal issues, found the relevant facts, and did not deny procedural fairness. The unsupported allegations and additional material did not show jurisdictional error or procedural unfairness, and there was no utility in an adjournment for further legal aid.

Court Disposition

Summons dismissed with costs.

Orders

  • ['The summons is dismissed with costs.']