This article is from the source 'guardian' and was first published or seen on . It last changed over 40 days ago and won't be checked again for changes.
You can find the current article at its original source at https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2019/nov/13/what-has-happened-with-cardinal-george-pells-appeal-against-child-sex-abuse
The article has changed 2 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.
Previous version
1
Next version
Version 0 | Version 1 |
---|---|
What has happened with Cardinal George Pell's appeal against child sex abuse conviction? | |
(32 minutes later) | |
The high court ruling was not as straightforward as it originally seemed, explains Paul Karp | |
Cardinal George Pell will get his day in the high court to argue against his conviction on historical child sexual abuse offences. | Cardinal George Pell will get his day in the high court to argue against his conviction on historical child sexual abuse offences. |
On Wednesday the full court gathered to announce the results of special leave applications, including Pell’s bid to overturn the decision of the Victorian court of appeal. | On Wednesday the full court gathered to announce the results of special leave applications, including Pell’s bid to overturn the decision of the Victorian court of appeal. |
What did the judges say? | What did the judges say? |
Justice Michelle Gordon said: | Justice Michelle Gordon said: |
So, Pell won the right to appeal? | So, Pell won the right to appeal? |
Justices Gordon and Edelman have referred in the application for special leave to appeal to the full court for argument “as on an appeal”. | Justices Gordon and Edelman have referred in the application for special leave to appeal to the full court for argument “as on an appeal”. |
This means that technically special leave was not granted, but nor was it refused. | This means that technically special leave was not granted, but nor was it refused. |
What happens now? | What happens now? |
Pell’s lawyers will present their case as if special leave had been granted, proceeding with his arguments on appeal. This will look and feel like an appeal. | Pell’s lawyers will present their case as if special leave had been granted, proceeding with his arguments on appeal. This will look and feel like an appeal. |
However, at any point in the case, the justices of the high court can direct Pell’s lawyers to make submissions about whether or not he should be granted special leave. | However, at any point in the case, the justices of the high court can direct Pell’s lawyers to make submissions about whether or not he should be granted special leave. |
So they’re starting with the substantive arguments about why the conviction should be quashed, but Pell has not technically cleared the threshold question of whether the court should hear the appeal. | So they’re starting with the substantive arguments about why the conviction should be quashed, but Pell has not technically cleared the threshold question of whether the court should hear the appeal. |
It’s a bit like snakes and ladders – Pell has moved forward a few squares, but at any point could slide back to having to justify why the court should weigh in on the rightness or wrongness of the conviction at all. | It’s a bit like snakes and ladders – Pell has moved forward a few squares, but at any point could slide back to having to justify why the court should weigh in on the rightness or wrongness of the conviction at all. |
Why would the judges decide the special leave application this way? | Why would the judges decide the special leave application this way? |
Special leave to appeal is the high court’s means of controlling whether or not it hears a case or not. | Special leave to appeal is the high court’s means of controlling whether or not it hears a case or not. |
By allowing the case to proceed “as on appeal” the court gets the benefit of hearing the substantive arguments without deciding definitively that it wants to make a decision upholding or overturning the Victorian court of appeal decision. | By allowing the case to proceed “as on appeal” the court gets the benefit of hearing the substantive arguments without deciding definitively that it wants to make a decision upholding or overturning the Victorian court of appeal decision. |
Now the decision will be owned collectively by all five or seven judges who hear the case, not just the two who heard the special leave application. | Now the decision will be owned collectively by all five or seven judges who hear the case, not just the two who heard the special leave application. |
Is this unusual? | Is this unusual? |
It’s not common in the high court for special leave applications to be argued as on appeal but it happens. It is an ordinary process of the court. | It’s not common in the high court for special leave applications to be argued as on appeal but it happens. It is an ordinary process of the court. |
What will the judges do now? | What will the judges do now? |
There will be directions for a full court hearing, most likely in 2020. | There will be directions for a full court hearing, most likely in 2020. |
After a substantive hearing the full court will decide to either dismiss the appeal, meaning Pell remains a convicted offender or the appeal is allowed, quashing the conviction and resulting in his release from jail. | After a substantive hearing the full court will decide to either dismiss the appeal, meaning Pell remains a convicted offender or the appeal is allowed, quashing the conviction and resulting in his release from jail. |
Previous version
1
Next version