18 Jan 2019
The Court refused the out‑of‑time certificate because the application was inexcusable and excessive delayed, raised issues not argued at the appeal and contrary to the applicant's earlier position, and lacked merit given the high threshold for wasted costs; accordingly certificate denied and costs ordered.
28 Apr 2005
The court granted the Applicant's application and issued a certificate in the same terms as the Appeal Committee because it was bound to follow the Appeal Committee's certification that the Walton direction question is of great and general importance; moreover, whether omission of the Walton direction is material is fact‑dependent and does not automatically require acquittal.
14 Jan 2003
The application for leave and extension of time was refused because no point of great and general importance was shown to arise, the application was made unacceptably late (over six months after Reasons were handed down contrary to the Practice Direction which requires, in these circumstances, an application within seven days), and the applicant failed to formulate any specific questions for certification; therefore a certificate under s32(2) Cap.484 was declined.