RC v The Queen

RC
v
THE QUEEN
[2021] HCASL 231
S169/2021

The applicant requires an extension of time to seek special leave to appeal from a decision of the Court of Criminal Appeal of the Supreme Court of New South Wales (R A Hulme, Hamill and Wilson JJ). He was previously refused an extension of time to seek special leave to appeal from that decision by Bell and Gageler JJ on 14 October 2020: RC v The Queen [2020] HCASL 208.
This application does not reveal a "compelling explanation or circumstance" which might otherwise justify a second application for special leave: Re Golding (2020) 94 ALJR 1014 at 1018 [11]; 384 ALR 204 at 208. In any event, the proposed appeal lacks sufficient prospects of success to warrant a grant of special leave. Accordingly, it would be futile to grant the extension of time that is sought.
Pursuant to r 41.08.1 of the High Court Rules 2004 (Cth), we direct the Registrar to draw up, sign and seal an order dismissing the application.

M.M. Gordon S.H.P. Steward

2 December 2021

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The applicant, RC, has applied for an extension of time to seek special leave to appeal against a decision made by the Court of Criminal Appeal of the Supreme Court of New South Wales. The matter was previously dismissed by Bell and Gageler JJ on 14 October 2020. The Supreme Court of New South Wales' Court of Criminal Appeal had previously made a ruling against RC, which they now sought to appeal to the High Court. The High Court was required to decide whether to grant an extension of time for RC to seek special leave to appeal from the decision of the Court of Criminal Appeal.

The High Court considered whether the application revealed a compelling explanation or circumstance to justify a second application for special leave, as well as whether the proposed appeal had sufficient prospects of success to warrant a grant of special leave. The Court found that the application did not reveal a compelling explanation or circumstance that might justify a second application for special leave. The Court also found that the proposed appeal lacked sufficient prospects of success to warrant a grant of special leave.

The Court dismissed the application and directed the Registrar to draw up, sign and seal an order dismissing the application. The Court found that it would be futile to grant the extension of time that was sought. The Court was of the view that the application did not meet the criteria required to grant an extension of time to seek special leave to appeal.

The High Court dismissed the application for an extension of time to seek special leave to appeal. The Court found that the application did not reveal a compelling explanation or circumstance to justify a second application for special leave, and that the proposed appeal lacked sufficient prospects of success to warrant a grant of special leave. The Court directed the Registrar to draw up, sign and seal an order dismissing the application.

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established