Frigger v The State of Western Australia

Frigger v The State of Western Australia involved an appeal by Angela Frigger against her conviction for making a false statement on oath. The case arose from two affidavits sworn by Frigger, one in 2008 and another in 2010, which contained statements about the financial liabilities of a company controlled by Frigger and her husband. The primary legal issue was whether the statements in the two affidavits were irreconcilable, thus establishing the offence of making a false statement on oath under section 169 of the Criminal Code (WA). The Court of Appeal considered the appellant's contentions that the trial judge inadequately addressed the defence case in his summing up and that the prosecution contravened the doctrine of witness immunity. The Court concluded that the appeal had a strongly arguable case, particularly regarding the trial judge's direction to the jury about the elements of the offence and the knowledge requirement. Additionally, the Court found exceptional reasons for granting bail, including the appellant's strong prospects of success on appeal and the length of time until the appeal would be heard. Consequently, the Court granted bail pending the determination of the appeal.