Cases and authorities

PRIVILEGE – Claim for legal professional privilege or settlement negotiation privilege – Where joint report was commissioned and prepared by second cross-defendant and a third party for the purposes ascertaining factual position in relation to allegedly defective pipes – HELD – Document not privileged – Not prepared for the dominant purpose of the second cross-defendant being provided with professional legal services relating to a proceeding or an anticipated proceedings – Document disclosed to third party in the absence of common interest.

CIVIL PROCEDURE – judgments – setting aside application under UCPR r 36.16 to set aside judgment - where plaintiff convicted of criminal offences by Local Court – appeal to Supreme Court under Crimes (Appeal and Review) Act 2001 – where plaintiff absented herself from part of the hearing in which judgment was given - appeal refused - whether judgment could be set aside - appeal within definition of “criminal proceedings” - no application of Uniform Civil Procedure Rules – no denial of procedural fairness – application dismissed

CONTRACT – offer and acceptance – plaintiffs contemplating the purchase of two parcels of real estate from persons not parties to the proceedings – the first defendant company provides a letter to the plaintiffs signed by the second defendant – letter indicates that the first defendant was “prepared to” buy the properties “back” at the same purchase price at which they were being acquired by the plaintiffs – the plaintiffs then proceed to complete the purchase of one property and sign a contract to acquire the other property, which also later proceeds to completion – whether the letter constituted an offer by the first defendant to the plaintiffs for the first defendant to acquire the properties from the plaintiffs at the price the plaintiffs purchased the properties from the third parties – whether valid consideration existed to support any contract made by the letter – whether a contract was made in terms of the letter for the first defendant to acquire the properties from the plaintiffs at the stated price – whether the letter constituted a promise to keep open for later acceptance an offer by the first defendant to acquire the properties – whether by failing to acquire the properties the first defendant has breached any contract made between the plaintiffs and the first defendant – whether the plaintiffs have suffered any loss or damage by reason of any breach of contract by the first defendant. SPECIFIC PERFORMANCE – whether the Court should grant a decree of specific performance of a contract requiring the first defendant to buy the two properties from the plaintiffs at the price at which they were originally acquired by the plaintiffs – discretionary defences – laches – contract made in 2009 – whether relief the nature of specific performance should be denied on account of the plaintiffs delay in commencing proceedings – the constitution of proceedings – whether two plaintiffs may be granted the remedy of specific performance requiring the sale of a property formerly jointly held, when one of them has since sold all that party’s interest in the property. STATUTE OF LIMITATIONS – running of time – first defendant contends any contract based upon the letter was made in 2009 and was breached shortly thereafter – proceedings not commenced until 2017 – first defendant contends proceedings for breach of contract brought outside the six-year limitation period and are now barred by Limitation Act 1969, s14 – plaintiffs contend the contract they rely upon was first breached in 2012 and these proceedings were brought within time – when was any contract made between the plaintiffs and the first defendant breached, so as to commence the running of time of the plaintiffs’ claim in contract – whether or not proceedings are statute barred. MISLEADING AND DECEPTIVE CONDUCT – plaintiffs allege that by signing the letter and causing it to be issued to the plaintiffs the second defendant engaged in misleading and deceptive conduct inducing the plaintiffs to acquire the two properties – whether the second defendant engaged in misleading or deceptive conduct – whether the plaintiffs were induced by the second defendant’s misleading or deceptive conduct to acquire the two properties – second defendant first joined into the proceedings in 2019 – whether the plaintiffs’ claim for misleading and deceptive conduct is statute barred – if misleading and deceptive conduct were established whether the plaintiffs have suffered loss or damage.

CIVIL PROCEDURE – Application for leave to further amend notice of appeal – Whether new issues raised by the proposed amendments – Whether respondents prejudiced by proposed amendments – no issue of principle

CIVIL PROCEDURE – discontinuance – costs – no consent to discontinue without paying costs – plaintiff sought leave to discontinue with no order as to costs – proceedings lacking practical utility – both defendants impecunious – defendants’ cross-claim abandoned – no right by way of defence and set-off to recover any amount exceeding the debt owed to the plaintiff – litigation had begun to “feed on itself” – Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 2005 (NSW), r 12.1 COSTS – discontinuance – usual rule that discontinuing party pay defendant’s costs – power to order otherwise – plaintiff sought leave to discontinue with no order as to costs – Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 2005 (NSW) (UCPR), r 42.19(2)

CRIME — Appeals — Appeal against convictions for non-compliance with Child Protection Prohibition Order and reporting requirements — Child Protection Prohibition Order annulled — Not contested by Crown CRIME — Appeals — Appeal against sentence — Where two aggregate sentences imposed for State and Commonwealth offences — Where aggregate sentence imposed for Commonwealth offences must be set aside — Remittal to sentencing judge

CORPORATIONS – Transfer of proceedings – Where compulsory acquisition proceedings commenced in this Court – Where oppression proceedings subsequently commenced in another Court – Where success on oppression proceedings may affect standing to pursue subsequent compulsory acquisition – Where success on compulsory acquisition may affect standing to pursue subsequent oppression proceedings – Where parties have not consented to transfer of oppression proceedings to this Court.

EQUITY – trusts and trustees – loan to pay security for costs order – whether giving rise to Quistclose trust CIVIL PROCEDURE – monies in court – order for security for costs with self-executing order for dismissal – plaintiff pays money into court after deadline – proceedings dismissed and defendant obtains judgment for costs – exercise of the court’s discretion to pay money to defendant

PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – Civil procedure – Leave to appeal from a costs decision of the Appeal Panel of the New South Wales Civil and Administrative Tribunal – Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2013 (NSW), s 83 – Whether the Tribunal misapplied s 60 in determining that special circumstances existed – Leave to appeal refused

Defamation – interest and costs – offer made – indemnity costs ordered – interest at less than usual rate for pre-judgment interest

COSTS – Indemnity costs - Application for indemnity costs – Whether Plaintiffs pursuit of various Interlocutory Processes was reasonable

EVIDENCE – privilege – client legal privilege – where one alleged co-conspirator was a lawyer – where alleged co-conspirators claim client legal privilege – whether privilege attaches to communications – whether co-conspirator was providing legal advice – whether dominant purpose of communications in furtherance of fraud – application withdrawn

CRIMINAL PROCEDURE – four co-accused – one unrepresented accused – application by represented parties for separate trial – whether separate trial should be ordered

CRIMINAL PROCEDURE – subpoena – application to set aside – fishing expedition – absence of legitimate forensic purpose

CRIMINAL PROCEDURE – trial – case management – pre-trial disclosure – scope of prosecution disclosure in aid of judicial review proceedings yet to be commenced CRIMINAL PROCEDURE – warrants – surveillance warrants – whether stay to consider whether further disclosure required to test whether warrants validly obtained CRIMINAL PROCEDURE – warrants – surveillance warrants – whether stay to consider whether further disclosure required to test whether AFP conduct in executing warrants was authorised

CORPORATIONS – application for leave to proceed against a company in liquidation – Corporations Act 2001 (Cth), s 471B – whether necessary to join company as proper party where equitable assignment of part of a debt – leave granted

PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – application to set aside orders of Registrar fixing concurrent hearing of leave to appeal and appeal itself – where proceedings still on foot in Common Law Division – related application to stay appeal proceedings

CIVIL PROCEDURE – Pleadings – Application for leave to appeal from refusal of leave to amend statement of claim – Whether primary judge failed to consider the prejudice to the applicants – Where separate proceedings would be antithetical to the just, quick and cheap determination of the real issues between the parties

CRIME — Appeals — Appeal against sentence —Applicant drove wife into river in a fit of rage and then attempted to rescue her – Applicant pleaded guilty to manslaughter - whether significance of rescue was diminished as a mitigating factor – no issue of principle CRIME — Appeals — Appeal against sentence — Manifest excess – whether sentence was manifestly excessive in the circumstances – ground of appeal dismissed – no issue of principle

PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – Judgment debt – Where judgment debt not paid – No issues of principle

CRIMINAL LAW – charges of murder and wounding with intent to cause grievous bodily harm - fitness enquiry – question of fitness to be tried – juvenile accused with autism and schizophrenia - “Presser” criteria – single issue at any trial - trial to be conducted in an efficient way likely before a judge alone – no requirement to challenge jurors – no need to test evidence or call evidence from accused – whether accused unfit to be tried in those circumstances

EQUITY — Trusts and trustees — Unit trusts – The First Plaintiff (“CRC”), a unitholder in a commercial unit trust the purchase of whose holdings were financed by the Second Plaintiff (“Max”), sought to recover funds held by the First Defendant (“CIS”) as the trustee of the trust known as the Gosford Ownership Trust (“GOT”) and funds held by a receiver. Under the GOT Constitution CRC was entitled to monthly distributions of income from the net income of a commercial property via another trust, Gosford Landholding Trust (“GLT”), and an amount due on redemption of the units following a sale of the property (“the Withdrawal Price”). CIS, as trustee of both GOT and GLT, filed a submitting appearance but the Second Defendant (“SIF”), as a holder of the Residual Units asserted that CIS was justified in withholding the monies otherwise due to CRC as part of the Withdrawal Price: (a) because monies paid to CRC over a lengthy period exceeded the Taxable Income on the net income earnt by the Trust and hence exceeded the amount to be “distributed” by the Trustee on behalf of the Trust; (b) because it was claimed $3.6M had been loaned by GOT to CRC; and (c) because if SIF’s contentions under (a) and (b) were accepted then the monies received by CRC were monies paid by CIS as trustee of GLT under the GLT Indemnity and CIS claimed it was entitled to be subrogated to CRC’s rights to the balance of the Withdrawal Amount (or alternatively to Max’s rights to the balance of the Withdrawal Amount) – construction of the GOT Constitution and whether cl 11.2(d) granted the trustee a discretion and, if so, whether it ought be inferred the discretion had been exercised by CIS – HELD: the trustee was granted a discretion but it should be inferred that the discretion was exercised in favour of the distributions to CRC exceeding Taxable Income – CRC is entitled to the balance of the Withdrawal Amount. EVIDENCE - burden of proof, presumptions, and weight and sufficiency of evidence – onus of proof – failure of SIF to call any witnesses concerning its claim that CIS paid excess amounts to CRC and loaned money to CRC – implications of failure to call witnesses – HELD: SIF bore the onus of proof which it has failed to discharge and further the implication was that evidence of such witnesses could give would not have assisted SIF’s case. EQUITY — Subrogation — Indemnity/ sureties – right of subrogation – alternative argument advanced on right of subrogation – CRC entered into an indemnity under which CIS (as trustee for GLT) agreed to indemnify CRC – whether the principles of subrogation apply to the GLT Indemnity and if so whether the claim by SIF on behalf of CIS (as trustee for GLT) extended to CRC’s right to recover the unpaid balance of the Withdrawal Price from GOT – HELD: there was no right of subrogation either on basis of indemnity or surety. EQUITY — Trusts and trustees — Trust instruments – Construction of cl 7 of the GLT Indemnity - whether the clause excluded the subrogation claim or whether it is ambiguous and should be read down – HELD: cl 7, of and by itself, excluded a claim for subrogation by GLT and was not ambiguous and should not be read down. ESTOPPEL — Estoppel by convention — Mutual assumption — Course of dealing – an alternative estoppel argument was advanced by CRC that GOT is estopped from contending amounts received by CRC after 1 July 2007 are to be dealt with differently than the amounts received before that date as it was not indicated that those payments were a mix of Taxable Income and undocumented loan drawdowns that would have to be repaid by CRC in the future – whether GOT’s actions gave rise to an estoppel by representation or by convention – HELD: if contrary to the Court’s finding that CIS as trustee of GOT had not in fact distributed all of the net income to CRC, the requirements for conventional or representational estoppel were not met.

TORTS – negligence – personal injury – slip and fall on boat ramp – determination of liability – risk of harm – duty of care – precautions taken – whether reasonable person in position of defendant would have taken precautions – s 5B(2) considerations – causation LOCAL GOVERNMENT – legal proceedings – torts – negligence TORTS – defences – Civil Liability Act 2002, s 5M – whether recreational activity – obvious risk – warnings – Civil Liability Act 2002, ss 5H, 5F and 5G – contributory negligence

CIVIL PROCEDURE - case management - vacation of hearing date - negligence - indemnity for claim under s 151Z(1)(d) Workers Compensation Act 1987 (NSW) -expert reports - delay

LAND LAW – contract for the sale of land – validity of Notice to Complete – plaintiffs enter into Option Deed under which defendant grants an option to purchase – plaintiffs take immediate possession of the property in accordance with the Option Deed – plaintiffs exercise the option several years later – parties exchange settlement sheets claiming various amounts in addition to amounts payable under contract for sale – defendant issues Notice to Complete – whether defendant in a position to issue Notice to Complete – whether defendant ready, willing and able to perform – whether defendant adopting an unequivocal stance concerning amounts due on completion – whether defendant required to provide Occupation Certificate – Notice to Complete held to be valid LAND LAW – contract for the sale of land – termination of contract – where time of the essence for completion of contract – where defendant insisting upon payments at settlement pursuant to other contractual arrangements – where plaintiffs incorrectly maintain that defendant is required to provide Occupation Certificate prior to completion – completion does not occur – defendant terminates contract for sale – defendant claims entitled to terminate contract for plaintiffs’ repudiation or alternatively pursuant to cl 12.7 of Option Deed – held that neither party ready, willing and able to complete – held that conduct of both parties amounted to repudiation – defendant able to terminate on account of plaintiffs’ repudiation but not entitled to recover the deposit or sue for damages – no entitlement to terminate under cl 12.7 of Option Deed LAND LAW – contract for the sale of land – rescission – defendant contends contract validly rescinded under cl 7 of standard form contract – where cl 7 precludes certain claims by purchaser – plaintiffs make claim for cost of replacement of roof – whether a claim made under cl 7 – defendant gives notice of intention to rescind – plaintiffs waive claim under contract but continue to assert claim otherwise – held that plaintiffs’ conduct viewed objectively does not show an intention to proceed under cl 7 – held that in any event claim was waived under cl 7 – held that waiver of claim under cl 7 does not amount to a waiver of claim at large – defendant not entitled to rescind LAND LAW – residential tenancy agreements – held that tenancy conferred under the Option Deed is a residential tenancy agreement within the meaning of the Residential Tenancies Act 2010 (NSW) – held that defendant gave notice of termination such that periodic tenancy was terminated – defendant entitled to mesne profits

LAND LAW — Caveats — Removal of caveat — Removal by order of court — whether there is a serious question to be tried — where the second defendant made a complaint to the Australian Financial Complaints Authority with respect to the exercise of a mortgagee’s power of sale — where that right was subsequently assigned to the plaintiff, who was not subject to the Australian Financial Complaints Authority Scheme — where the operation of s 333 of the National Consumer Credit Protection Act 2009 (Cth) means that is unlikely that the assignment would be invalid — where there is a real risk that the property will be sold at a substantial undervalue after an 11 day advertisement process — where there is a substantial prospect that the Court will find, on a final hearing, that the plaintiff has breached its duty of good faith in the manner of the sale — where the amount the plaintiff is entitled to recover from the second defendant under his guarantee should be reduced as the increase in default interest may be a penalty — whether the guarantee of the debt is liable to be unenforceable under the Contracts Review Act 1980 (NSW) — where there are multiple serious questions to be tried LAND LAW — Caveats — Removal of caveat — Removal by order of court — whether the balance of convenience is in favour of the caveat being withdrawn — where there are numerous considerations, including interest and valuation, as to whether the security value of the properties has been exhausted — where there must be a significant probability that the effect of the prevention of completion of the Contract would impose a risk of ultimate loss on the plaintiff — where there is substantial reason for doubt that the plaintiff would have the means to pay compensation to the second defendant — where both the plaintiff and the second defendant have not offered a valuable undertaking as to damages to either secure the continuation or withdrawal of the caveat — result pending on the undertaking proposed

CRIMINAL LAW - evidence - consciousness of guilt - accused organised return trip to China - purpose of trip to bring daughter to Australia - where Prosectuor does not allege “flight” as consciousness of guilt - danger of unfair prejudice - danger of misuse of evidence - evidence excluded

RECEIVERS AND MANAGERS – Court-appointed receivers – remuneration – approval of remuneration – remuneration for work already performed – work performed on a time-charge basis – whether the amount of remuneration claimed, based on hourly rates, is fair and reasonable – remuneration approved RECEIVERS AND MANAGERS – Court-appointed receivers – remuneration – approval of remuneration – remuneration for work to be performed in the future – where it is necessary for the receiver to perform future work in respect of the partnership, including lodging tax returns – whether proposed remuneration for future work is fair and reasonable – remuneration for future work approved in a fixed sum RECEIVERS AND MANAGERS – Court-appointed receivers – termination of receivership – where receivership is proposed to be terminated but it is necessary for the receiver to perform limited future work, including lodging tax returns – receivership terminated except to the limited extent that the receiver has control over a particular operating bank account EQUITY – remedies – declarations – whether it is appropriate to make a declaration as to the existence of matters of mere fact – where no evidence of the underlying basis for the declaration sought – declaration refused

ADMINISTRATIVE LAW – judicial review – Motor Accidents Compensation Act 1999 (NSW) – application for exemption from CARS assessment – allegations of false and misleading statements in a material particular relating to injury, loss and damage – where question of complex quantum issues was raised – whether assessor posed the wrong question – whether assessor misconstrued the scope and nature of his power – whether assessor took account of irrelevant considerations – where question of suitability may involve considerations of capacity

COSTS – security for costs – where plaintiff’s financial position provided sufficient reason to believe it will be unable to pay defendants’ costs – where defendants delayed bringing application for security – whether defendants’ conduct materially contributed to plaintiff’s inability to meet an order for security – whether proceedings would be stultified if an order for security was made – where plaintiff’s director not impecunious and failed to proffer an undertaking to pay defendants’ costs – security for costs ordered – security for costs payable in tranches

CRIMINAL LAW – evidence - hearsay - admissions -whether admissible against co-offender - admissions made with authority - co-conspirators rule - where co-accused’s statements attribute shooting to applicant - makeshift Buddhist temple - scope of common purpose - whether statement made in furtherance of common purpose - whether common purpose extends to desire not to be detected - logical extension of prosecution submission that post-offence statements admissible in every case - not the law - evidence inadmissible

CRIMINAL LAW - evidence - admissions made with authority - co-conspirators rule - common purpose to murder - where one offender makes admissions to a witness criminal concerned in events - whether admissible against co-accused - hearsay - admissions - whether statements made in furtherance of common purpose - scope of common purpose - whether extends to common purpose to avoid detection

CRIMINAL LAW – extended supervision order – Terrorism (High Risk Offenders) Act 2017 (NSW) – whether appellant was a “convicted NSW terrorism activity offender” – whether primary judge applied heightened standard of satisfaction imposed by Act – whether appellant had made statement advocating support for any terrorist act or violent extremism – deeming provision extended statements advocating support to “using or displaying images or symbols” associated with organisation that supports terrorist acts or violent extremism – whether images or symbols excluded alpha-numeric images or symbols – whether appellant’s posting on Facebook concerning new nasheed from Islamic State’s Ajnad Media engaged deeming provision – whether deeming provision should be read down on basis of constitutionally implied limitation on legislative power to restrict political communication – appeal dismissed

PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – application for leave to appeal – settlement agreement – outstanding issue as to the parties to the agreement – whether proceeding to be discontinued wholly or in part – application to vacate hearing of leave application – costs

PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – Court of Appeal – application to re-open decision of the Court – Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 2005 (NSW) r 36.16 – the slip rule – procedural fairness

TORTS – negligence – general principles – Civil Liability Act 2002 (NSW) – personal injury – operating a catching pen gate at a greyhound race – whether “recreational activity” – whether par (c) of the definition of “recreational activity” in Civil Liability Act, s 5K imposes an “artificial meaning” to the word “recreational” – potential anomalous consequence of literal construction – whether activity dangerous – obvious risk – whether respondent in breach of duty to appellant – whether respondent ought to have taken precautions against risk of harm – causation – contributory negligence STATUTORY INTERPRETATION – departure from literal meaning – whether additional words can be read into statute to avoid potential unintended consequences – whether ordinary meaning of defined terms can be used in construction of the statutory definition of the term – unreasonable consequences – activities caught under the definition of “recreational activity” asserted to have an unacceptable reach

EQUITY — Unconscionable conduct — Special disadvantage — Whether unconscientious advantage taken — Whether gift fair, just and reasonable — Undue influence — Whether findings of primary judge supported by available evidence

CRIMINAL LAW – Sentencing – Appeal against sentence – Self-represented litigant – Whether sentence imposed was “unreasonably long” or manifestly excessive – Sentence not manifestly excessive – Other grounds not made out

CRIMINAL LAW – appeal – appeal against sentence – aggravated break, enter and commit serious indictable offence – robbery in company – sentencing judge had regard to Children’s Court criminal history – error established – manifest excess – Bugmy principles – youth and history of dysfunction – parity – re-sentencing

CRIME – appeals – appeal against conviction – circumstantial case – coincidence evidence – no coincidence reasoning because no reliance on improbability of similarities – similarities proof of involvement in drug syndicate CRIME – appeals – appeal against sentence – manifest excess – stern but not excessive

EQUITY — Claim by plaintiffs for orders for production of documents and information in the possession, custody or control of the defendants belonging to the plaintiffs, produced under contract for the plaintiffs, or containing the plaintiffs’ confidential information — where defendants have made a credible and conscientious effort to disclose all of the documents and information within the stipulated categories — where the Court accepts the evidence given for the defendants that all reasonable searches have been carried out — whether the Court should order the defendants to permit the plaintiffs’ information technology professional to image and search the defendants’ computers and electronic data storage facilities, and if so on what terms — where there is insufficient likelihood that the investigations would yield additional documents or information to justify the intrusion upon the defendants’ private rights — summons dismissed

CORPORATIONS – Arrangements and reconstructions – Schemes of arrangement or compromise – Application under s 411 of the Corporations Act 2001 (Cth) for orders approving scheme of arrangement.

CIVIL PROCEDURE – stay of proceedings – pending appeal – where there is no practical benefit of imposing a stay CIVIL PROCEDURE – summary disposal – dismissal of proceedings – where action may be maintainable

CRIME - sentence – accessory after the fact to murder – plea of guilty to this offence when offender arraigned for murder – where offender drove assassins to and from crime scene– where offender understood purpose of attending the deceased’s home was to assault the deceased - where offender did not know the assassins were armed – where offender has a criminal history and is currently serving prison time for another offence – where offences committed subsequently to the present offence – where offender has provided valuable assistance to police concerning a number of crimes – where some evidence suggests that the offender has changed course - poor prospects of rehabilitation – concerns for reoffending – where discount awarded for the plea and assistance – where no finding of special circumstances SENTENCING — sentencing procedure – victim impact statements – where relatives of deceased are not victims of accessory crime for purpose of making victim impact statements

ADMINISTRATIVE LAW – reviewability – justiciability – where decisions not amenable to certiorari CIVIL PROCEDURE – parties – wrong person made a party – application to substitute party – where addition of defendants sought

APPEALS – leave – dismissal of appeal from order for provision of security for costs – orders made against sole director and shareholder – no question of principle – leave refused

CIVIL PROCEDURE – leave to appeal – where refusal to grant adjournment in order to allow prisoner to review potentially privileged communications – where court orders for filing of submissions and evidence breached – where judge given impression that submissions in support of claim for privilege well advanced but submissions were never filed – where judge may have assumed that prisoner had reviewed materials – where this assumption was apparently incorrect and prisoner had filed material to this effect – where potentially privileged material had entered public domain as a result of dismissal of application following refusal of adjournment – where no utility in granting leave in light of this matter. CIVIL PROCEDURE – refusal to recuse for alleged bias – no issue or error of principle. LEGAL PROFESSIONAL PRIVILEGE – where potentially privileged documents enter the public domain as a result or following refusal of adjournment application and dismissal of claim – no utility in a grant of leave to appeal.

TORTS — Defences — Self-defence — factual contest as to whether elements of defence under s 52 of the Civil Liability Act 2002 established APPEALS — From finding of fact — Credibility of witnesses — where primary judge had advantage of seeing principal witnesses give evidence CIVIL PROCEDURE — Court of Appeal — requirement in r 51.36(2) of the UCPR to include a statement setting out the findings of fact challenged and the findings contended for — where appellant’s grounds of appeal predominantly challenged primary judge’s findings of fact but failed to comply

APPEAL – appeal against Land and Environment Court judge’s decision to refuse remitter to commissioner after upholding s 56A appeal – whether denial of procedural fairness by not giving parties opportunity to be heard on matters not raised on s 56A appeal – extension of time to file appeal granted – leave to appeal granted – appeal upheld – whether matter to be remitted to judge or commissioner – matter remitted to commissioner

CRIME — appeal and review — appeal from Children’s Court and Local Court to Supreme Court — by person convicted or sentenced on a question of law alone — provision of background report — s 25 of the Children (Criminal Proceedings) Act