The three-factor test for extension of time to appeal (delay and explanation, interests of parties, substantial injustice/prospects of success) from Abdul v R applies to all criminal appeals, not just sentence appeals. The strength of the Crown case and the likely application of the proviso are relevant to whether a substantial injustice would result from refusal of an extension. A trial judge's direction that implicitly asks the jury 'why would the complainant falsely complain?' may infringe the Palmer v The Queen principle even where the question is not directly 'why would she lie?'. Evidence of a suspect's failure to return police calls or attend a police station is analogous to the exercise of the right to silence and may not be admissible as consciousness of guilt evidence.
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 5 later cases that cite this judgment.
2 of the 5 citing cases carry a classified treatment. How each court treated it is available to signed-in members.