Sarath Lakshman Hettiarachchi v The Queen

SARATH LAKSHMAN HETTIARACHCHI
v
THE QUEEN
[2013] HCASL 5
M96/2012

The applicant was convicted in the Supreme Court of Victoria of murdering his parents-in-law. He applied for leave to appeal against his conviction to the Court of Appeal of the Supreme Court of Victoria on various grounds: an alleged misdirection on the standard of proof, a complaint about the reception of bad character evidence, a contention that the trial judge erred in his direction on relationship evidence, a contention that the trial judge erred in his direction on circumstantial evidence, and a claim that the verdict was unsafe and unsatisfactory. The application was dismissed. An application for special leave to appeal to this Court was considered by Hayne and Crennan JJ, but dismissed on 9 February 2012.
The applicant has now applied again for special leave to appeal against the Court of Appeal's order. The Draft Notice of Appeal contains 20 grounds. Some of these relate to those already dealt with by the Court of Appeal. Others are novel. The papers offer no explanation as to why the arguments were not previously raised. This application is an abuse of process and must be dismissed.
Pursuant to r 41.10.5 we direct the Registrar to draw up, sign and seal an order dismissing the application.

J.D. Heydon
26 February 2013 V.M. Bell

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The case of Sarath Lakshman Hettiarachchi v The Queen involves the applicant, who was convicted in the Supreme Court of Victoria of murdering his parents-in-law. Following his conviction, the applicant sought leave to appeal against the decision to the Court of Appeal of the Supreme Court of Victoria, citing various grounds for appeal, including alleged misdirection on the standard of proof, improper reception of bad character evidence, errors in the trial judge's direction on relationship and circumstantial evidence, and a claim that the verdict was unsafe and unsatisfactory. The Court of Appeal dismissed the application, and the applicant subsequently sought special leave to appeal to the High Court. This application was also dismissed, but the applicant has now applied again for special leave to appeal against the Court of Appeal's order, presenting 20 grounds for appeal, some of which overlap with the grounds already considered by the Court of Appeal, and others which are new. The High Court found that the applicant's application was an abuse of process and dismissed it.

The primary legal issue before the Court was whether the applicant's renewed application for special leave to appeal should be entertained, given that many of the grounds for appeal had already been considered and dismissed by both the Court of Appeal and the High Court. The Court also considered whether the new grounds for appeal presented by the applicant warranted further consideration. The Court was required to determine whether the applicant's application was an abuse of process, and if so, whether it should be dismissed.

In reaching its decision, the Court considered the nature of the application and the grounds presented by the applicant. The Court noted that the application was an abuse of process as many of the grounds for appeal had already been considered and dismissed by both the Court of Appeal and the High Court. The Court found that the applicant's application was an abuse of process and dismissed it. The Court emphasised that an applicant who seeks special leave to appeal must demonstrate that the appeal has a real chance of success and that the application is not an abuse of process.

The Court found that the applicant's renewed application for special leave to appeal was an abuse of process and dismissed it. The Court ordered that the Registrar draw up, sign and seal an order dismissing the application. The Court emphasised the importance of ensuring that the process of appealing a conviction is not abused, and that applicants demonstrate that their appeal has a real chance of success.

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established