Commissioner of Police v No Respondent; Commissioner of Police v Coroners Court of South Australia

The parties to this matter were the Commissioner of Police, acting as an appellant, and the Coroners Court of South Australia, which was the respondent. The dispute concerned certain statements made by a Deputy Coroner during an inquest into the death of Mr Kuskoff. The Commissioner sought to challenge these statements, which were alleged to be findings made by the Deputy Coroner. The case was heard by the Supreme Court of South Australia.

The legal issues before the Court were whether the statements made by the Deputy Coroner constituted "findings" for the purposes of an appeal under section 27 of the relevant legislation, and whether the Deputy Coroner had failed to afford procedural fairness to a person identified as "DA" by not allowing them an opportunity to respond to the conclusion that they ought to have reflected longer before firing certain shots. The Court was required to determine if these statements were appealable and if the inquest process had adhered to the principles of natural justice.

The Court reasoned that the impugned statements did not amount to findings in the legal sense, but rather represented a failure to make a definitive finding, which was consistent with the available evidence, including expert medical reports. The Court noted that this approach, in fact, gave "DA" the benefit of the doubt. Regarding procedural fairness, the Court affirmed the established principle that coronial inquests carry an obligation to afford procedural fairness to individuals whose interests may be adversely affected by potential findings. However, in this instance, the Court found that the statements in question were not definitive findings that would necessitate such an opportunity to respond, and therefore, the ground of appeal based on a denial of procedural fairness failed.