Supreme Court dismisses appeal on preliminary jurisdiction issue due to lack of sufficient reason for adjournment.
Cipro (CY)
Sintesi Legislator
Generato dall'IAThe Supreme Court refused to adjourn a criminal appeal to await pending applications for mandamus and certiorari, finding no sufficient justification for the delay. The Attorney-General argued that these prerogative orders offered a speedier remedy for questions of law, but the court noted they were alternative remedies that could have been filed earlier. Consequently, the appeal was heard on its preliminary jurisdictional issue and subsequently dismissed with leave granted for the appellant to withdraw.
Regesto Legislator
Generato dall'IASection 148(1) of the Criminal Procedure Law; The court lacks jurisdiction to entertain an appeal against a refusal to reserve questions of law unless the matter is clearly a question of law, and an appeal cannot be adjourned pending alternative remedies without sufficient reason.
Parole chiave
Generato dall'IADisposizioni normative citate
Generato dall'IADecisioni correlate
Generato dall'IATesto completo
[*1041] 1971 July 10
(TRIANTAFYLLIDES, P.,STAVRINIDES :L.LOIZOU,
HADJIANASTASSIOU, A. LOIZOU, JJ.)
APPELLATE JUKISDICTION
The Attorney-General of the Republic,
Appellant,
v.
Andreas Georghiou Drakos,
Respondent.
(Criminal Appeal No,3273).
Criminal Procedure - Practice - Appeal
- Application to adjourn pending determination of mandamus and certiorari proceedings in respect of the same subject matter No sufficient reason justifying adjournment
- Application refused - Leave granted for withdrawal of appeal.
Practice - Appeal - Adjournment See under "Criminal Procedure".
Appeal - Adjournment - See under "Criminal Procedure".
Adjournment - Appeal - See under "Criminal Procedure".
A. Frangos, Senior Counsel of the Republic, with M. Kyprianou, Counsel of the Republic, for Appellant,
K. Saveriades for Respondent (accused in Criminal Case NO.434/71 before the Kyrenia Assize Court).
G. Cacoyannis with D. Papachrysostomou and C. Erotoicritou for N. Theofilou (co-accused in the same Criminal Case). [*1042]
TRIANTAFYLLIDES, P.: We are, first, going to hear this appeal on the preliminary issue as to whether or not we have jurisdiction to entertain an appeal of this nature, viz. an appeal against a refusal of the Kyrenia Assize Court to reserve for the opinion of this Court, on an application to that effect made on behalf of the Attorney-General under section l48(l) of the Criminal Procedure Law (Cap. 155), matters alleged by counsel for the Republic to be questions of law, but considered by the Assize Court not to be questions of law, and, therefore, not being questions to be reserved under section l48(l).
Mr._ Frangos: Before I deal with this issue I would like to bring to Your Honours’ knowledge that this morning we have filed two applications for leave to apply for the prerogative orders of mandamus and certiorari in relation to the Ruling which is the subject-matter of the appeal and I humbly submit that it might be better if leave were granted and the applications for such orders were heard and determined before this appeal.
TRIANTAFYLLIDES, P. : At what time did you file the applications for leave to apply for the prerogative orders?
Mr. Frangos: At about 9:15 a.m. today.
TRIANTAFYLLIDES, P.: Have you been, granted leave?
Mr. Frangos: Not yet. [*1043]
TRIANTAFYLLIDES, P.: At this moment we are in Court to deal with the appeal; are you applying that we should adjourn the hearing of the appeal?
Mr. Frangos: That is the effect of my submission. I apply that this appeal be adjourned in the meantime. The proceedings for mandamus and certiorari may provide a speedier and more effective remedy regarding a point which is of great public importance.
TRIANTAFYLLIDES, P.: This appeal was filed on the 8th July, 1971. On the same day all parties were notified that it was going to be heard today, at 9:30 a.m., on the preliminary issue of jurisdiction. We have now been asked by counsel for appellant to adjourn it because just before the time fixed for the hearing of this appeal there were filed by the appellant applications for leave to apply for orders of mandamus and certiorari in relation to the Ruling which is the subject-matter of the appeal. No leave has yet been granted in respect thereof, or could have been granted in the short time intervening between the time when leave was applied for and the present sitting of this Court. As these applications are alternative remedies which could have been resorted to in the first place, instead of making the appeal, or at least could have been filed together with the appeal, we see no sufficient reason which would justify us to adjourn the appeal; so we shall proceed now with it. [*1044]
- short break -
Mr. Frangos: There are previous decisions of this Court to the effect that it did not have jurisdiction to entertain appeals concerning certain matters arising in the course of criminal proceedings; without conceding that no appeal lies on the present occasion, but in view of the fact that applications for leave to apply for orders of mandamus and certiorari have been filed and are pending already before this Court, I seek leave to withdraw this appeal.
TRIANTAFYLLIDES, P.: Leave granted to withdraw the appeal which consequently stands dismissed.
Order accordingly.