The principles governing leave to appeal out of time in the ACT require an adequate explanation for delay, identifiable merit in the proposed appeal, and a risk of miscarriage of justice if leave is refused. A mistaken belief about the cost of appealing, derived from a misreading of a lawyer's email, may just adequately explain delay. However, dissatisfaction with forensic decisions made at trial on advice — including the decision not to call the client to give oral evidence — does not constitute a ground of appeal and cannot be used to obtain a rehearing.
The full text is available to signed-in members.