Sinkovich v Attorney General of New South Wales [2013] NSWCA 383

Court of Appeal Supreme Court New South Wales Medium Neutral Citation: Sinkovich v Attorney General of New South Wales [2013] NSWCA 383 Hearing dates: 16 October 2013 Decision date: 18 November 2013 Before: Bathurst CJ at [1]; Beazley P at [3]; Basten JA at [4]; Price J at [80]; Beech-Jones J at [82] Decision: The Court makes the following declaration: Declare that an error of law on the part of the sentencing judge and, on appeal, the Court of Criminal Appeal, which may have caused a sentence to be imposed of greater severity than would otherwise have been the case, constitutes an aspect of the proceedings giving rise to the sentence which may form the basis of a doubt or question as to circumstances having the potential to mitigate the sentence imposed, for the purpose of considering an application for an inquiry under s 78 of the Crimes (Appeal and Review) Act 2001 (NSW). [Note: The Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 2005 provide (Rule 36.11) that unless the Court otherwise orders, a judgment or order is taken to be entered when it is recorded in the Court's computerised court record system. Setting aside and variation of judgments or orders is dealt with by Rules 36.15, 36.16, 36.17 and 36.18. Parties should in particular note the time limit of fourteen days in Rule 36.16.] Catchwords: ADMINISTRATIVE LAW - judicial review - legislative power to limit review - whether state Supreme Court's power to review judge's administrative function constitutionally protected

ADMINISTRATIVE LAW - refusal to direct inquiry under Crimes (Appeal and Review) Act 2001 (NSW), Part 7 - decision by judge of a superior court - whether order quashing refusal available - whether order requiring judge to determine application according to law available - whether declaratory relief available - Supreme Court Act 1970 (NSW), ss 69, 75