Dacich v Commissioner of Corrective Services

[2020] NSWCA 359

NSW Court of Appeal

View on CaseLaw

Built by Barristers,
For Australian Law.

See how it works

Interrogate

Catchwords

1. Administrative Law
2. › Habeas corpus
3. › Writ of habeas corpus ad subjiciendum
4. › To whom writ should be directed
5. › Who has custody of prisoners in correctional centres
6. › Whether Commissioner of Corrective Services or governor of correctional centre is proper respondent
7. › Crimes (Administration of Sentences) Act 1999 (NSW), ss 72, 232
1. Administrative Law
2. › Habeas corpus
3. › Writ of habeas corpus ad subjiciendum
4. › Whether prosecutor entitled to appear
5. › Director of Public Prosecutions not proper respondent but submissions heard
1. Judgments and Orders
2. › Sentence of imprisonment
3. › Warrant of commitment
4. › Whether warrant required in addition to court order
5. › Sentence of superior court is itself sufficient authority for execution
6. › Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999 (NSW), s 62
1. Judgments and Orders
2. › Sentence of imprisonment
3. › Judicial review sought
4. › Stay of execution of order
5. › Whether filing of incompetent judicial review application effected statutory stay
6. › Supreme Court Act 1970 (NSW), ss 69C, 69D

Quick Take

A warrant of commitment is not a necessary precondition for lawful detention where a superior court has imposed a sentence, and the Commissioner of Corrective Services (rather than the governor) may be joined as respondent without objection in habeas corpus proceedings for prisoners.