Tritton v Clarke [2018] NSWCCA 31

Tritton v Clarke [2018] NSWCCA 31

The application for an extension of time was refused because the questions in the stated case were inappropriate to answer. The first question had an obvious affirmative answer but did not arise on the District Court appeal because the stated findings already entailed consideration of the surrounding circumstances. The second question did not raise, or could not be answered as, a question of law because the reasons for judgment were not appended and the applicant's complaint was in substance a challenge to factual findings and the weight given to circumstances. Given the stated case limitations, the Court could not go behind or supplement the stated facts, and the stated case procedure...

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
07 March 2018
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal Act 1912 (nsw) S 5 B Stated Case From District Court Criminal Appeal / Application for Extension of Time to Submit Questions in a Case Stated to the Court of Criminal Appeal
Outcome
Application for extension of time refused.
Legal Topics
['stated Case Procedure' 'questions of Law' 'extension of Time' 'possessing Fish Illegally Taken' 'statutory Defence Under Fisheries Management Act 1994 (nsw) S 35(2)' 'limits on Challenging Findings of Fact']
['criminal Law' 'fisheries Law' 'criminal Appeals and Procedure'] ['stated Case Procedure' 'questions of Law' 'extension of Time' 'possessing Fish Illegally Taken' 'statutory Defence Under Fisheries Management Act 1994 (nsw) S 35(2)' 'limits on Challenging Findings of Fact']

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 Appeal Act 1912 (nsw) S 5 B Stated Case From District Court Criminal Appeal / Application for Extension of Time to Submit Questions in a Case Stated to the Court of Criminal Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the time for submission of the questions in the stated case should be extended under Criminal Appeal Act 1912 (NSW) s 5B(2).' 'Whether the questions submitted were questions of law arising on the District Court appeal and should be answered.' 'Whether the defence that the person charged could not reasonably have known fish were illegally taken requires consideration of the surrounding circumstances of the individual case.' 'Whether the District Court failed to apply the correct test in determining the statutory defence under Fisheries Management Act 1994 (NSW) s 35(2).']

Ratio Decidendi

The application for an extension of time was refused because the questions in the stated case were inappropriate to answer. The first question had an obvious affirmative answer but did not arise on the District Court appeal because the stated findings already entailed consideration of the surrounding circumstances. The second question did not raise, or could not be answered as, a question of law because the reasons for judgment were not appended and the applicant's complaint was in substance a challenge to factual findings and the weight given to circumstances. Given the stated case limitations, the Court could not go behind or supplement the stated facts, and the stated case procedure...

Court Disposition

Application for extension of time refused.

Orders

  • ["Refuse the applicant's application for an extension of time to submit the questions contained in the case stated dated 28 August 2017 and filed on 7 September 2017." 'No order for costs.']