Harris v R [1954] HCA 51

Harris v R [1954] HCA 51

The application for leave to appeal should be refused because, although the sentence was probably greater than would have been imposed in Australia, there was no ground to justify intervention by the High Court as there was no miscarriage, unsoundness, or unreasonableness in the sentencing discretion exercised by...

Source-derived case information.

Parties
Applicant: Edward Norman Harris; Respondent: The Queen
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
12 October 1954
Procedural Posture
Application for Leave to Appeal (criminal) / High Court Application for Leave to Appeal From the Supreme Court of the Territory of Papua and New Guinea
Outcome
application for leave to appeal refused
Legal Topics
Sentence Appeals, Principles Governing Appellate Review of Sentence, Discretion in Sentencing, Jurisdiction Under Papua and New Guinea Act
Criminal Law Appellate Procedure Sentence Appeals Principles Governing Appellate Review of Sentence Discretion in Sentencing Jurisdiction Under Papua and New Guinea Act

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 2 Authorities cited 5 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 5
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Edward Norman Harris

Applicant

The Queen

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Application for Leave to Appeal (criminal) / High Court Application for Leave to Appeal From the Supreme Court of the Territory of Papua and New Guinea

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the sentence imposed by the Supreme Court of the Territory of Papua and New Guinea was excessive or unsound in the exercise of discretion
  2. 2 Whether the High Court should intervene on sentence on appeal

Ratio Decidendi

The application for leave to appeal should be refused because, although the sentence was probably greater than would have been imposed in Australia, there was no ground to justify intervention by the High Court as there was no miscarriage, unsoundness, or unreasonableness in the sentencing discretion exercised by the Supreme Court.

Court Disposition

application for leave to appeal refused

Orders

  • Application for leave to appeal refused