Clark v Attorney General of New South Wales [2020] NSWCA 70

Court of Appeal Supreme Court New South Wales Medium Neutral Citation: Clark v Attorney General of New South Wales [2020] NSWCA 70 Hearing dates: 13 February 2020 Decision date: 30 April 2020 Before: Basten JA at [1]; Macfarlan JA at [11]; McCallum JA at [12] Decision: Dismiss the summons with costs Catchwords: ADMINISTRATIVE LAW – judicial review – application under s 78 Crimes (Appeal and Review) Act 2001 for an inquiry into the applicant's convictions and sentences for child sexual offences – decision to refuse to consider or otherwise deal with the application – applicant seeking to contradict conclusions reached in exercising that power – whether decision entailed vitiating error Legislation Cited: Crimes (Appeal and Review) Act 2001 (NSW), ss 78, 79 Crimes Act 1900 (NSW), s 66C(4) Criminal Appeal Act 1912 (NSW), s 6 Criminal Appeal Rules (NSW), r 50C Criminal Procedure Act 1986 (NSW), s 150 Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 2005 (NSW), r 36.11 Cases Cited: Armand-Iskak v Attorney-General of New South Wales [2019] NSWCA 145 Buck v Bavone (1976) 135 CLR 110; [1976] HCA 24 Clark v R (No 2) [2015] NSWCCA 271 Clark v R [2014] NSWCCA 236 Clark v R [2015] NSWCCA 265 Clark v State of New South Wales (2006) 66 NSWLR 640; [2006] NSWSC 673 Clark v State of New South Wales; Clark v Robards [2014] NSWSC 742 Minister for Immigration and Citizenship v Li (2013) 249 CLR 332; [2013] HCA 18 Patsalis v Attorney General for New South Wales (2013) 85 NSWLR 463; [2013] NSWCA 343 PFC v R (No 2) [2014] NSWCCA 241 PFC v R [2011] NSWCCA 275 PFC v R; R v PFC [2011] NSWCCA 130 R v PFC [2011] NSWCCA 117 Sinkovich v Attorney General of New South Wales (2013) 85 NSWLR 783; [2013] NSWCA 383 SKA v The Queen (2011) 243 CLR 400; [2011] HCA 13 Category: Principal judgment Parties: Peter Frederick Clark (Applicant) Attorney General of New South Wales (Respondent) Representation: Counsel: Peter Frederick Clark (self-represented) P Aitken (Respondent)