NSW Caselaw
Supreme Court New South Wales
Medium Neutral Citation: Patsalis v Local Court of NSW [2022] NSWSC 159 Hearing dates: 10 February 2022 Date of orders: 25 February 2022 Decision date: 25 February 2022 Jurisdiction: Common Law Before: Garling J Decision: (1) Summons dismissed. Catchwords: CRIME — appeal and review — appeal from Local Court to Supreme Court — by person against whom an interlocutory order is made with leave on a question of law alone — whether question of law alone — whether leave should be granted — only one out of seven grounds involved a question of law alone — no reason for leave to be granted CRIMINAL PROCEDURE — subpoena — application to set aside — illegitimate use of subpoena to obtain in effect discovery — no legitimate forensic purpose — not "on the cards" that the documents would assist the plaintiff's case APPEALS — procedural fairness — failure to give reasons — adequacy of reasons — reasons adequate Legislation Cited: Crimes Act 1900 (NSW), ss 192E(1)(b), 546D Crimes (Appeal and Review) Act 2001 (NSW), s gv53(3)(b) Supreme Court Act 1970 (NSW), s 23 Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 2005 (NSW) r 6.27 Cases Cited: Attorney-General of NSW v Chidgey [2008] NSWCCA 65; 182 A Crim R 536 Carlton v R [2008] NSWCCA 244; 189 A Crim R 332 Commissioner for Railways v Small (1938) 38 SR (NSW) 564 Fantakis v Local Court of New South Wales [2020] NSWSC 931 Feeney v NSW Police [2017] NSWSC 190 Franklin v Commissioner of Police [2018] NSWSC 310 NAR v PPC1 [2013] NSWCCA 25; 224 A Crim R 535 Orr v Cobar Management Pty Limited (2020) 103 NSWLR 36; [2020] NSWCCA 220 PPC v Williams [2013] NSWSC 1607; 238 A Crim R 25 Queanbeyan City Council v Environment Protection Authority [2011] NSWCCA 108 R v Jenkin (No 2) [2018] NSWSC 697 R v PL [2009] NSWCCA 256; 261 ALR 365 Williams v The Queen (1986) 161 CLR 278; [1986] HCA 88 Texts Cited: Not Applicable Category: Principal judgment Parties: Michael Patsalis (P) Local Court of New South Wales (D1) Graeme Kilgour (D2) Andrew Boucas (D3) Attorney-General for NSW (Intervenor) Representation: Counsel: Self-Represented (P) L Chapman (Intervenor)
We try to embed the page this law was scraped from. If the site blocks framing, you still get the link and a local excerpt.
Last checked with source on —
Checking whether the official page can be embedded…
Plain-English simplify of this law: a short summary, key points, and both sides of the argument. Generated on first view via Replicate, then cached. Vote on what helps your study.
No study brief is cached for this law yet. Sign up to generate a plain-English brief.
Sign up to generate