Shapkin v Director of Public Prosecutions [2024] NSWCA 217

Shapkin v Director of Public Prosecutions [2024] NSWCA 217

Because the summons was listed for final hearing imminently, the applicant preferred that the stay motion be stood over to that hearing, the Director did not oppose that course, and determining the motion separately would be inefficient and potentially subject to review or further motion, it was appropriate to stand over the notice of motion and make directions to ensure the summons was ready for hearing.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
26 August 2024
Procedural Posture
Summons Pursuant to S 69 of the Supreme Court Act 1970 (nsw) Seeking Judicial Review of the Refusal of the District Court to State a Case Pursuant to S 5 B of the Criminal Appeal Act 1912 (nsw); Notice of Motion Seeking Stay of District Court Judgment / Procedural Ruling and Directions Before Final Hearing of Summons
Outcome
Notice of motion stood over to the hearing of the summons; procedural timetable varied; hearing date confirmed; costs reserved.
Legal Topics
['stay of Execution' 'jurisdictional Error' 'refusal to State a Case' 'overriding Purpose' 'directions']
['civil Procedure' 'judicial Review' 'criminal Procedure'] ['stay of Execution' 'jurisdictional Error' 'refusal to State a Case' 'overriding Purpose' 'directions']

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

Summons Pursuant to S 69 of the Supreme Court Act 1970 (nsw) Seeking Judicial Review of the Refusal of the District Court to State a Case Pursuant to S 5 B of the Criminal Appeal Act 1912 (nsw); Notice of Motion Seeking Stay of District Court Judgment / Procedural Ruling and Directions Before Final Hearing of Summons

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether any purpose would be served by hearing the notice of motion for a stay before the imminent final hearing of the summons seeking judicial review.' 'Whether the summons should be managed so as to be ready for final hearing on 27 September 2024.']

Ratio Decidendi

Because the summons was listed for final hearing imminently, the applicant preferred that the stay motion be stood over to that hearing, the Director did not oppose that course, and determining the motion separately would be inefficient and potentially subject to review or further motion, it was appropriate to stand over the notice of motion and make directions to ensure the summons was ready for hearing.

Court Disposition

Notice of motion stood over to the hearing of the summons; procedural timetable varied; hearing date confirmed; costs reserved.

Orders

  • ["Stand over the notice of motion dated 26 July 2024 until the hearing of Mr Shapkin's summons filed 5 June 2024. At present, the summons is listed for final hearing on 27 Sept 2024." 'Vary the procedural timetable governing preparation for the summons as follows: (a) direct the applicant to file and serve his white...