Marriner v Smorgon [1989] HCA 69
The warrant was irregular and should not have issued because its form was appropriate only to a charge of contempt in the face of the court; however, because it had been executed and was spent, the Full Court was right not to set it aside, and the grant of special leave to appeal was rescinded.
- Jurisdiction
- Australia
- Procedural Posture
- Appeal Concerning a Warrant Authorizing Arrest and Detention to Answer a Charge of Contempt / High Court of Australia; Grant of Special Leave to Appeal Rescinded
- Outcome
- Grant of special leave to appeal rescinded.
- Legal Topics
- ['warrant for Arrest' 'inherent Power of the Supreme Court' 'preservation of Subject Matter of Litigation' 'spent Warrant']
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Procedural Posture
Appeal Concerning a Warrant Authorizing Arrest and Detention to Answer a Charge of Contempt / High Court of Australia; Grant of Special Leave to Appeal Rescinded
Legal Issues
- 1 ["Whether the warrant was justified as an exercise of the Supreme Court's inherent power to preserve the subject matter of the litigation." 'Whether the form of the warrant was appropriate.' 'Whether a warrant that had already been executed and was spent should be set aside.']
Ratio Decidendi
The warrant was irregular and should not have issued because its form was appropriate only to a charge of contempt in the face of the court; however, because it had been executed and was spent, the Full Court was right not to set it aside, and the grant of special leave to appeal was rescinded.
Court Disposition
Grant of special leave to appeal rescinded.
Orders
- ['Rescind the grant of special leave to appeal.']
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