A District Court judge hearing an appeal under s 18 of the Crimes (Appeal and Review) Act 2001 (NSW) who addresses the errors alleged by the appellant, acknowledges the natural limitations of proceeding on the record, and exercises independent judgment does not constructively fail to exercise jurisdiction. The question of whether such an appeal requires demonstration of error at first instance, or whether the District Court's powers may be exercised regardless of error, remains unsettled, with Basten JA favouring an error requirement and Simpson JA favouring independent assessment regardless of error.
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 18 later cases that cite this judgment.
7 of the 18 citing cases carry a classified treatment. How each court treated it is available to signed-in members.