Doyle v Commissioner of Police (No 3) [2020] NSWCA 240

Court of Appeal Supreme Court New South Wales Medium Neutral Citation: Doyle v Commissioner of Police (No 3) [2020] NSWCA 240 Hearing dates: 22 September 2020 Decision date: 30 September 2020 Before: Leeming JA Decision: 1. Note that for the purposes of order 1 made on 5 March 2020 entitling access to persons who have given an appropriate undertaking to inspect item 24, the undertakings contained in the short minutes of order provided on 21 September 2020 are appropriate. 2. Continue the stay of order 1 made by order 4 of 5 March 2020 until 5 pm on Wednesday 7 October 2020. 3. List the proceedings for directions before me at 9.30am on 21 October 2020. 4. Reserve the question of costs. Catchwords: APPEAL – stay of execution – informal application for stay pending application for leave to appeal – whether issue already decided by Court of Appeal – whether already decided on remitter from Court of Appeal – whether subsequent High Court authority confirmatory of position – whether prospect of success and balance of convenience favoured a stay – application refused – orders made permitting access to seized item, subject to undertakings, for limited purpose of permitting Commissioner to be heard as to the grant of injunctive relief. Legislation Cited: Evidence Act 1995 (NSW), s 138 Cases Cited: Aon Risk Services Australia Limited v Australian National University (2009) 239 CLR 175; [2009] HCA 27 Barbeliuk v NSW Commissioner of Police & Ors [2020] HCASL 187 Bunning v Cross (1978) 141 CLR 54; [1978] HCA 22 Doyle v Commissioner of Police [2020] NSWCA 11 Doyle v Commissioner of Police (No 2) [2020] NSWCA 34 Doyle v Commissioner of Police (No 3) [2019] NSWSC 1787 R v Swaffield (1998) 192 CLR 159; [1998] HCA 1 Smethurst v Commissioner of the Australian Federal Police [2020] HCA 14; 94 ALJR 502 Walton v Gardiner (1993) 177 CLR 378; [1993] HCA 77 Category: Consequential orders (other than Costs) Parties: Philip William Doyle (First appellant) Mark Barbeliuk (Second appellant) Commissioner of Police (First respondent) Detective Senior Constable Tiffany O'Neill (Second respondent) Deputy Registrar Cally D'Arcy (Third respondent) Representation: Counsel: R Stitt QC (Appellants) P Singleton (First and second respondents)