NSW Caselaw
Supreme Court New South Wales
Medium Neutral Citation: Cunningham v Local Court of New South Wales [2018] NSWSC 499 Hearing dates: 19 April 2018 Decision date: 19 April 2018 Jurisdiction: Common Law Before: R A Hulme J Decision: 1. Leave to appeal pursuant to s 53(3) of the Crimes (Appeal and Review) Act 2001 against the order made in the Local Court on 6 June 2017 refusing to vacate a hearing date and transfer the proceedings to another court refused. 2. Application to quash the order made in the Local Court on 6 June 2017 refusing to vacate a hearing date and transfer the proceedings to another court refused. Catchwords: CRIME – appeal – interlocutory order of magistrate refusing to uphold claim of apprehension of bias – where applicant the defendant in Local Court criminal proceedings– where applicant's husband a Corrective Services officer in Local Court – where magistrate refused to uphold apprehension of bias – where second magistrate from different Local Court seconded for hearing – no basis for apprehended or actual bias – whether first magistrate failed to provide procedural fairness by refusing to adjourn matter – no procedural unfairness – whether first magistrate failed to apply Criminal Procedure Act s 30 – counsel failed to raise provision at hearing – whether first magistrate erred by making erroneous finding of fact – error did not vitiate decision Legislation Cited: Children (Criminal Proceedings) Act 1987 (NSW) s 15A Crimes (Appeal and Review) Act 2001 (NSW) s 53(3)(b) Criminal Procedure Act 1986 (NSW) s 30 Mental Health (Forensic Provisions) Act 1990 (NSW) s 32 Supreme Court Act 1970 (NSW) ss 23, 69 Cases Cited: Johnson v Johnson (2000) 201 CLR 488; [2000] HCA 48 Levy v State of Victoria (1997) 189 CLR 579; [1997] HCA 31 White v District Court of NSW (1998) 45 NSWLR 313 Category: Principal judgment Parties: Margaret Cunningham Local Court of New South Wales (First defendant) Constable Shannon Mulley (Second defendant) Attorney General of NSW (Amicus curiae) Representation: Counsel: Mr S Lawrence (Plaintiff) Mr R Ranken (Attorney General as amicus curiae)
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