Lawyers acting in criminal appeals must diarise and closely monitor statutory time limits, and law firms must have proper supervisory systems in place. Affidavits in support of extension of time applications must fully and frankly disclose all relevant events and, where relevant, take responsibility for personal acts or omissions contributing to delay. The Court will not overlook delay merely because the offender is not personally responsible and has an arguable case. Where coincidence evidence of multiple complainants discloses the same type of offending with numerous distinctive features, the prejudicial effect may be intrinsic to the probative value, raising doubt whether s 101(2) can operate to exclude such evidence.
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 18 later cases that cite this judgment.
4 of the 18 citing cases carry a classified treatment. How each court treated it is available to signed-in members.