Templeton (a pseudonym) v Director of Public Prosecutions (NSW) (No 2) [2019] NSWCA 105

Templeton (a pseudonym) v Director of Public Prosecutions (NSW) (No 2) [2019] NSWCA 105

Even assuming in the applicant's favour that she was under arrest during the police interview, that the caution was insufficient, and that she had an argument that the ERISP should not have been admitted, she still had no arguable case for judicial review because the ERISP was admitted with the consent of her counsel, she was bound by counsel's conduct absent exceptional circumstances, and any error in admitting the ERISP would not have been jurisdictional error.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
14 May 2019
Procedural Posture
Application for Judicial Review; Notice of Motion to Set Aside Judgment and Rehear Application / Motion Under R 36.16(3 A) of the Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 2005 (nsw) After Judgment Delivered on 21 December 2018
Outcome
Dismissed with costs
Legal Topics
['motion to Set Aside Judgment' 'rehearing Application' 'uniform Civil Procedure Rules 2005 (nsw), R 36.16(3 A)' 'police Interview Record' 'jurisdictional Error']
['practice and Procedure' 'judicial Review' 'criminal Procedure'] ['motion to Set Aside Judgment' 'rehearing Application' 'uniform Civil Procedure Rules 2005 (nsw), R 36.16(3 A)' 'police Interview Record' 'jurisdictional Error']

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 1 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Procedural Posture

Application for Judicial Review; Notice of Motion to Set Aside Judgment and Rehear Application / Motion Under R 36.16(3 A) of the Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 2005 (nsw) After Judgment Delivered on 21 December 2018

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the Court should set aside its previous judgment and rehear the judicial review application under r 36.16(3A) of the Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 2005 (NSW).' 'Whether an alleged misapprehension about the applicant being under arrest at the time of the police interview affected the dismissal of the judicial review application.' "Whether any error in admitting the ERISP into evidence could found judicial review of the applicant's convictions."]

Ratio Decidendi

Even assuming in the applicant's favour that she was under arrest during the police interview, that the caution was insufficient, and that she had an argument that the ERISP should not have been admitted, she still had no arguable case for judicial review because the ERISP was admitted with the consent of her counsel, she was bound by counsel's conduct absent exceptional circumstances, and any error in admitting the ERISP would not have been jurisdictional error.

Court Disposition

Dismissed with costs

Orders

  • ['The notice of motion filed on 28 December 2018 should be dismissed with costs.']