MALEY v HUTCHINS [1993] NSWCA 170

MALEY v HUTCHINS

SUPREME COURT OF NEW SOUTH WALES COURT OF APPEAL

KIRBY P, MAHONEY and MEAGHER JJA 1 March 1993, 8 April 1993

[1993] NSWCA 170

DISTRICT COURT — prerogative type relief — whether error amenable to correction — Justices Act 1902, s146 — whether error made within jurisdiction or irregularities such as to show that judge hearing application under s127A of the Justices Act 1902 never properly entered into the exercise of his jurisdiction — held: (Mahoney and Meagher JJA; Kirby P dissenting): The District Court is entitled to adopt informal procedures for the speedy determination of disputes — The errors (if any) of the judge were made within jurisdiction and were thus not amenable to correction in the Court of Appeal.

CRIMINAL LAW and PROCEDURE — conviction by Local Court — appeal to District Court — appeal by way of rehearing — appellant fails to appear — appeal dismissed and convictions confirmed — late application within time for order setting aside dismissal of appeal — excuse offered for non-appearance by appellant — judge (Freeman DCJ) dismisses application on grounds that appellant had not shown that it was "in the interests of justice" to provide relief — on summons for relief in the nature of prerogative writ to District Court — held: (Mahoney and Meagher JJA; Kirby P dissenting): Relief would be denied because no error was shown in the decision of the judge concerning the "interests of justice". Any such error was not amenable to correction by the Court of Appeal in the exercise of its supervisory jurisdiction.

DISTRICT COURT — procedures — informality — whether need for minimum requirements of formality to be observed. Pacific Formwork Pty Ltd v Bignill, Court of Appeal, unreported, 5 August 1992; (1992) NSWJB 102 considered — per Mahoney JA (Meagher JA concurring; Kirby P dissenting): Procedural rules are functional. The District Court may proceed with less formal rules if the parties agree and the interests of justice do not otherwise require.