The accused sought an extension of time to bring an application to quash his committal for trial following a preliminary inquiry on a charge of aggravated assault.
The request was brought approximately ten months after the committal order and was based on an alleged conflict of interest arising from one counsel representing multiple accused at the preliminary inquiry.
The court held that the evidence at the preliminary inquiry, including the complainant’s direct identification of the accused as the assailant, made committal inevitable.
The issue of conflict had not been raised before the preliminary inquiry judge, and the accused had acquiesced to continuing with the same counsel despite being advised of the potential conflict.
The court concluded that the interests of justice did not warrant extending the time to challenge the committal.
