The High Court has revealed it rejected a bid by former New South Wales Labor Minister Eddie Obeid to have charges of misconduct in public office stayed.

Obeid, 72, is charged over allegations about an approach to a senior NSW Maritime Authority officer in 2007, about restaurant leases at Circular Quay.

In January this year, the court suppressed details of the application to protect a trial due to begin in February.

But today reasons for its decision were released after the non-publication orders lapsed.

Obeid wanted the High Court to stay the charges pending a special leave application to mount a full appeal to the court.

Key elements of his argument were that the charge was not valid and that the state Supreme Court had no jurisdiction.

Since his trial began in February, the Supreme Court in Sydney has heard Obeid made representations between August and November 2007 to NSW Maritime Authority deputy CEO Steve Dunn over restaurant leases which his family had an interest in, with the intention of seeking a beneficial outcome.

Not worth fragmenting the criminal process: Justice

Justice Stephen Gageler said at first sight the jurisdiction claim appeared strong.

But he found the suggested consequence that he would instead be tried by the NSW Parliament was nothing more than theoretical.

"What is important to be borne in mind however, is that the relief which the applicant would ultimately seek from this court ... is limited to orders which would result in the vindication of his private interest," he said.

Justice Gageler also noted: "There is a longstanding and general reluctance on the part of this court in point of policy to make orders which would have the effect of fragmenting a criminal process which has already been set in train".

He pointed out that for the court to interfere, there would have to be exceptional circumstances, but that in this case neither of the key arguments were enough to justify fragmenting the process.

Justice Gageler also noted there was no reason Obeid would not be able to challenge the result of any trial in the court of appeal or the High Court where he was still pursuing a special leave application.

It is not known when there will be further action in the Supreme or the High Courts.