NSW Caselaw
Court of Appeal Supreme Court New South Wales Medium Neutral Citation: GAR v Attorney General of New South Wales and Supreme Court of New South Wales [2017] NSWCA 47 Hearing dates: 12 December 2016 Date of orders: 16 March 2017 Decision date: 16 March 2017 Before: McColl JA Decision: Motion dismissed Catchwords: BIAS – apprehended bias – judicial review of dismissal of application under s 78 Crimes (Appeal and Review) Act 2001 (NSW) for review of conviction of sexual intercourse without consent – application to disqualify all judges of the Supreme Court from hearing summons for judicial review – allegation of judicial conspiracy to pervert the course of justice – whether reasonable apprehension of bias – whether fair-minded observer might reasonably apprehend that all judges of the Court might not decide the case impartially – whether principle of necessity available Legislation Cited: Crimes Act 1900 (NSW Crimes (Appeal and Review) Act 2001 (NSW) Criminal Appeal Act 1912 (NSW) Criminal Appeal Rules (NSW) Evidence Act 1995 (NSW) Supreme Court Act 1970 (NSW) Cases Cited: Antoun v R (2006) 80 ALJR 497; [2006] HCA 2 Bainton v Rajski (1992) 29 NSWLR 539 Bakarich v Commonwealth Bank of Australia [2010] NSWCA 314 British American Tobacco Australia Services Ltd v Laurie [2009] NSWCA 414 British American Tobacco Australia Services Ltd v Laurie (2011) 242 CLR 283; [2011] HCA 2 Buttrose v Attorney General of New South Wales [2015] NSWCA 221 CUR24 v Director of Public Prosecutions (2012) 83 NSWLR 385; [2012] NSWCA 65 Dranichnikov v Minister for Immigration and Multicultural Affairs 77 ALJR 1088; [2003] HCA 26 Ebner v Official Trustee in Bankruptcy (2000) 205 CLR 337; [2000] HCA 63 GAR v R [2003] NSWCCA 224 GAR v R (No 1) [2010] NSWCCA 163 GAR v R (No 2) [2010] NSWCCA 164 GAR v R (No 3) [2010] NSWCCA 165 GAR – Application for an inquiry into conviction pursuant to s 78 of the Crimes (Appeal and Review) Act 2001 [2014] NSWSC 1734 GAR – Application for an inquiry into conviction pursuant to s 78 of the Crimes (Appeal and Review) Act 2001 [2016] NSWSC 1205 Goodwin v Commissioner of Police [2012] NSWCA 379 Isbester v Knox City Council (2015) 255 CLR 135; [2015] HCA 20 Jia Le Geng v Minister for Immigration and Multicultural Affairs (1998) 84 FCR 87 Jia Le Geng v Minister for Immigration and Multicultural Affairs (1999) 93 FCR 556; [1999] FCA 951 Johnson v Johnson (2000) 201 CLR 488; [2000] HCA 48 Laws v Australian Broadcasting Tribunal (1990) 170 CLR 70; [1990] HCA 31 McGovern v Ku-Ring-Gai Council (2008) 72 NSWLR 504; [2008] NSWCA 209 Michael Wilson & Partners Limited v Nicholls (2011) 244 CLR 427; [2011] HCA 48 Minister for Immigration and Multicultural Affairs v Jia (2001) 205 CLR 507; [2001] HCA 17 Patsalis v Attorney General for New South Wales (2013) 85 NSWLR 463; [2013] NSWCA 343 Penson v Titan National Pty Ltd [2015] NSWCA 404 R v Commonwealth Conciliation and Arbitration Commission; Ex parte Angliss Group (1969) 122 CLR 546; [1969] HCA 10 R v Markuleski (2001) 52 NSWLR 82; [2001] NSWCCA 290 Re Colina; Ex Parte Torney (1999) 200 CLR 386 [1999] HCA 57 Re JRL; Ex parte CJL (1986) 161 CLR 342; [1986] HCA 39 Sun Zhan Qui v Minister for Immigration and Ethnic Affairs (1997) 81 FCR 71; [1977] FCA 1488 Waterhouse v Independent Commission Against Corruption [2015] NSWCA 300 Category: Principal judgment Parties: GAR (Applicant) Attorney General of New South Wales (First Respondent) Supreme Court of New South Wales (Second Respondent) [no appearance] Representation: Counsel: Self-represented (Applicant) J C Davidson (First Respondent) File Number(s): 2016/336497 Publication restriction: Pursuant to Crimes Act 1900 (NSW), s 578A there is to be no publication of any matter that identifies or is likely to lead to the identification of the complainant in the matter which led to GAR's conviction in 2002 of the offence of sexual intercourse without consent. Decision under appeal Court or tribunal: Supreme Court of New South Wales Jurisdiction: Common Law Citation: [2016] NSWSC 1205 Date of Decision: 29 August 2016 Before: Adamson J File Number(s): 2016/77528
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