Legal Research
Cases
DPP v Nicholls

DPP v Nicholls

Case [2010] VSC 397

No judgment structure available for this case.

Type to search within this case.

This content is currently unavailable.

Details

AGLC: DPP v Nicholls [2010] VSC 397
Case: [2010] VSC 397
Decision Date: 6 September 2010

CaseChat Overview and Summary

AI summary not yet generated for this case.

Orders

Orders of the court

Full text does not contain this section.

Background

Background to the litigation

Full text does not contain this section.

Evidence

Evidence Before The Court

Full text does not contain this section.

Decision

Reasons for decision

Full text does not contain this section.

Ratio Decidendi

Legal Principle Established

Full text does not contain this section.

Actions

Citations

DPP v Nicholls [2010] VSC 397

Most Recent Citation

Director of Public Prosecutions v Nicholls (No. 2) [2010] VSC 398

Cases Citing This Decision

R v Fernando (No 1); Re a young person [2022] NSWSC 1535
Citation 1 (Para 29)

…5 of the Evidence Act, [3] and whether, in the circumstances of this case, I was bound by either approach. 3. R v BO [2012] NSWDC 195; DPP v Nicholls [2010] VSC 397; Fletcher v The Queen [2015] VSCA 146.…
Director of Public Prosecutions (NSW) v Banks [2019] NSWSC 363
Citation 2 (Para 17)

…pursuant to s 65(2). His Honour adopted the reasoning of Beach J in Director of Public Prosecutions (Victoria) v Nicholls (2010) 204 A Crim R 306; [2010] VSC 397 to the effect that a successful objection under the Evidence Act 2008 (Vic), s 18 rendered a person unavailable for the purpose of s 65 of the Victoria…
R v Lewis (No 2) [2018] NSWDC 273
Citation 3

…“30. When revising these remarks I became aware of the decision of Justice Beach in DPP v Nicholls [2010] VSC 397. There His Honour held that s 65 could apply to make prima facie admissible a prior representation by a witness after a s 18(6) order had been made. It does not appear to me that the point about the c…
R v A2; R v KM; R v Vaziri (No. 4) [2015] NSWSC 1306
Citation 4 (Para 178)

…d C2 were relevantly unavailable for the purpose of s.65, I would follow the reasoning of Beach J in Director of Public Prosecutions (Vic) v Nicholls [2010] VSC 397; 204 A Crim R 306 at 311-312 [18]-[21]. Beach J ruled that a successful objection under s.18 Evidence Act 2008 (Vic) rendered a person unavailable fo…
Sanderson v Rabuntja [2014] NTSC 13
Citation 5

…ss 18(2), (6), (7), 65 Peach v Bird (2006) 17 NTLR 230; Semple v Williams (1990) 156 LSJS 40, applied. Dennis v Davis [2010] NTSC 35; DPP v Nicholls [2010] VSC 397; Fleming v The Queen (1998) 197 CLR 250; Soulemezis v Dudley (Holdings) Pty Ltd (1987) 10 NSWLR 247, referred to. REPRESENTATION: Counsel: Appellant:…
R v B.O. [2012] NSWDC 195
Citation 6 (Para 1)

…When revising these remarks I became aware of the decision of Justice Beach in DPP v Nicholls [2010] VSC 397. There His Honour held that s 65 could apply to make prima facie admissible a prior representation by a witness after a s 18(6) order had been made. It does not appear to me that the point about the contin…
Re Rodgers [2025] VSC 248
Citation 7 (Para 1)

…ct ’), she will be an ‘unavailable’ witness and the prosecution may seek to rely on her statement. See DPP v Nicholls [2010] VSC 397; Fletcher v The Queen [2015] VSCA 146. If KR does not attend and the prosecution take all reasonable steps to compel her to give evidence without success, she will be ‘unavailable’…
R v McDermott (Ruling No 5) [2015] VSC 652
Citation 8

…[8][2010] VSC 397.…
Director of Public Prosecutions v Sajanesh Easwaralingam [2010] VSC 437
Citation 9

…[7][2010] VSC 397 (Unreported, Beach J, 6 September 2010).…
Director of Public Prosecutions v Nicholls (No. 2) [2010] VSC 398
Citation 10 (Para 1)

…ppeal was brought by the DPP on behalf of the informant in accordance with s 272(2). My reasons for allowing the appeal are set out in DPP v Nicholls [2010] VSC 397.…

Cases Cited

Statutory Material Cited

R v Alchin [2015] NSWSC 2112
Citation 1 (Para 1)

…rising out of a contempt of court”.[6] [4]See Sneza Suteski (2002) 128 ACrimR 275, and then on appeal R v Suteski (2002) 56 NSWLR 182; R v Alchin (2006) 200 FLR 204 and R v Darmody [2010] VSCA 41, [24]-[26]. [5][2007] NSWSC 976. [6]Ibid at [14]-[18].…
R v Darmody [2010] VSCA 41
Citation 2 (Para 1)

…[6] [4]See Sneza Suteski (2002) 128 ACrimR 275, and then on appeal R v Suteski (2002) 56 NSWLR 182; R v Alchin (2006) 200 FLR 204 and R v Darmody [2010] VSCA 41, [24]-[26]. [5][2007] NSWSC 976. [6]Ibid at [14]-[18].…
Mindshare Communications Ltd v Orleans Investments Pty Ltd [2007] NSWSC 976
Citation 3 (Para 1)

…) 128 ACrimR 275, and then on appeal R v Suteski (2002) 56 NSWLR 182; R v Alchin (2006) 200 FLR 204 and R v Darmody [2010] VSCA 41, [24]-[26]. [5][2007] NSWSC 976. [6]Ibid at [14]-[18].…
Siemens Ltd v Schenker International (Australia) Pty Ltd [2004] HCA 11
Citation 4 (Para 1)

…ustralian Securities Commission v Marlborough Goldmines Limited (1993) 177 CLR 485, 492; Siemens Limited v Schenker International (Australia) Pty Ltd (2004) 216 CLR 418, 467 [154].…
R v Suteski [2002] NSWSC 596
Citation 5 (Para 1)

…de concerning the consequences arising out of a contempt of court”.[6] [4]See Sneza Suteski (2002) 128 ACrimR 275, and then on appeal R v Suteski (2002) 56 NSWLR 182; R v Alchin (2006) 200 FLR 204 and R v Darmody [2010] VSCA 41, [24]-[26]. [5][2007] NSWSC 976. [6]Ibid at [14]-[18].…
R. v. Hilsley [1998] VSCA 143
Citation 6 (Para 1)

…n 18 provides: [1]Section 18 of the Evidence Act is the re-enactment of the repealed s 400 of the Crimes Act 1958, as to which see R v DJT [1998] 4 VR 784, 792 and DPP v Lee [2009] VSC 576.…
Australian Securities Commission v Marlborough Gold Mines Ltd [1993] HCA 15
Citation 7 (Para 1)

…[8]See paragraph [19] above. [9]See paragraph [18] above. [10][2007] NSWSC 976. [11] Australian Securities Commission v Marlborough Goldmines Limited (1993) 177 CLR 485, 492; Siemens Limited v Schenker International (Australia) Pty Ltd (2004) 216 CLR 418, 467 [154].…
Director of Public Prosecutions v Lee [2009] VSC 576
Citation 8 (Para 1)

…of the Evidence Act is the re-enactment of the repealed s 400 of the Crimes Act 1958, as to which see R v DJT [1998] 4 VR 784, 792 and DPP v Lee [2009] VSC 576.…

AI Chat coming soon