384. Summary rejection of appeal

Where the grounds of appeal do not raise any question of law and it appears to the appellate court that the evidence is sufficient to support the conviction and that there is no material in the circumstances of the case which could raise a reasonable doubt whether the conviction was right or lead the appellate court to consider that the sentence ought to be reduced, the appeal may, without being set down for hearing, be summarily rejected by an order under the hand of a Judge or a presiding Judge (as the case may be) certifying that the appellate court, having perused the record, is satisfied that the appeal has been brought without any sufficient ground of complaint.

Where an appellate court comprises more than one Judge, the decision of the appellate court to reject the appeal summarily under subsection (1) can only be made by a unanimous decision of all the Judges sitting in the appellate court.

Notice of the rejection must be served on the appellant.

If, in any case rejected under subsection (1), the appellant gives, within 14 days of service of notice of the rejection on the appellant, notice to the Registrar of the Supreme Court of an application for permission to amend the appellant’s grounds of appeal so as to raise a question of law, accompanied by a certificate signed by an advocate specifying the question to be raised and undertaking to argue it, the Chief Justice (in the case where the appeal is made to the Court of Appeal) or any Judge sitting in the General Division of the High Court (in the case where the appeal is made to the General Division of the High Court) may grant permission to amend the grounds of appeal accordingly and shall restore the appeal for hearing.

For the purposes of subsection (4), the question whether a sentence ought to be reduced is deemed not to be a question of law.