Zhang v R [2023] NSWCCA 98

Zhang v R [2023] NSWCCA 98

The trial judge's refusal to adjourn the trial was a proper exercise of discretion, as adequate time and resources had been afforded, and further delay was not justified. The refusal to recuse was not appealable under s 5F, and no actual or apprehended bias was demonstrated.

Parties
Applicant: Li Zhang; Respondent: Rex
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
28 April 2023
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal Interlocutory Rulings
Outcome
Leave to appeal refused
Legal Topics
Interlocutory Appeals, Adjournment of Trial, Judicial Bias and Recusal, Pre Trial Procedure
Criminal Law Interlocutory Appeals Adjournment of Trial Judicial Bias and Recusal Pre Trial Procedure

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 3 Authorities cited 13 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 5
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Li Zhang

Applicant

Rex

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal Interlocutory Rulings

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the refusal of trial adjournment was affected by error in the exercise of the discretion as described in House v The King
  2. 2 Whether the trial judge's refusal to recuse himself for apprehended or actual bias was amenable to appeal under s 5F of the Criminal Appeal Act 1912 (NSW) and, if so, whether bias was demonstrated

Ratio Decidendi

The trial judge's refusal to adjourn the trial was a proper exercise of discretion, as adequate time and resources had been afforded, and further delay was not justified. The refusal to recuse was not appealable under s 5F, and no actual or apprehended bias was demonstrated.

Court Disposition

Leave to appeal refused

Orders

  • Leave to appeal the interlocutory decisions is refused.