High Court Bulletin

Link copied
Case Copied 36 min read

High Court Bulletin

Produced by the Legal Research Officer,
High Court of Australia Library


[2017] HCAB 9 (27 November 2017)

A record of recent High Court of Australia cases: decided, reserved for judgment, awaiting hearing in the Court’s original jurisdiction, granted special leave to appeal, refused special leave to appeal and not proceeding or vacated

1: Summary of New Entries
2: Cases Handed Down
3: Cases Reserved
4: Original Jurisdiction
5: Court of Disputed Returns
6: Special Leave Granted
7: Cases Not Proceeding or Vacated
8: Special Leave Refused

1: Summary of New Entries

2: Cases Handed Down

Case

Title

Van Beelen v The Queen

Criminal Law

Thorne v Kennedy

Family Law

HFM045 v The Republic of Nauru

Migration

3: Cases Reserved

Case

Title

Kalbasi v The State of Western Australia

Criminal Law

Probuild Constructions (Aust) Pty Ltd v Shade Systems Pty Ltd & Anor

Judicial Review

Maxcon Constructions Pty Ltd v Vadasz & Ors

Judicial Review

Falzon v Minister for Immigration and Border Protection

Migration

4: Original Jurisdiction

5: Court of Disputed Returns

Case

Title

Re Nash

Court of Disputed Returns

6: Special Leave Granted

Case

Title

Strickland (a pseudonym) v Commonwealth Director of Public Prosecutions & Ors; Tucker (a pseudonym) v Commonwealth Director of Public Prosecutions & Ors; Hodges (a pseudonym) v Commonwealth Director of Public Prosecutions & Ors; Galloway (a pseudonym) v Commonwealth Director of Public Prosecutions & Ors

Criminal Law

Collins v The Queen

Criminal Law

Nobarani v Mariconte

Probate

7: Cases Not Proceeding or Vacated

Case

Title

Traljesic v Bosnia and Herzegovina & Anor

Extradition

CRI028 v The Republic of Nauru

Migration

YAU026 v The Republic of Nauru

Migration

YAU027 v The Republic of Nauru

Migration

Briggs v State of New South Wales

Negligence

2: Cases Handed Down

The following cases were handed down by the High Court of Australia during the November 2017 sittings.

Criminal Law

Van Beelen v The Queen

A8/2017: [2017] HCA 48

Judgment delivered: 8 November 2017

Coram: Bell, Gageler, Keane, Nettle and Edelman JJ

Catchwords:

Criminal law – Appeal against conviction – Second or subsequent appeal – Application for permission to appeal pursuant to s 353A(1) of Criminal Law Consolidation Act 1935 (SA) – Where appellant convicted of murder – Where expert evidence of time of death given at trial based on stomach contents of deceased – Where new evidence demonstrated expert estimation of time of death at trial erroneous – Where new evidence required to be fresh and compelling in order to be admitted – Where evidence compelling if reliable, substantial and highly probative in context of issues in dispute at trial – Whether new evidence substantial – Whether new evidence highly probative in context of issues in dispute at trial – Whether in interests of justice to consider new evidence on appeal – Whether admission of evidence based on stomach contents at trial occasioned substantial miscarriage of justice – Whether significant possibility jury acting reasonably would have acquitted had new evidence been before it.

Words and phrases –…

CaseChat AU logo

Keep reading for free

Create a free CaseChat account to read High Court Bulletin and more:

  • Read every judgment in full
  • Ask AI and get answers linked to paragraphs
  • See how each paragraph was cited in later cases
  • Download judgments as PDF or Word
Continue with Google

One click creates your free account or signs you in.

By continuing you agree to the Terms and Privacy Policy.

Details
Case
[2017] HCAB 9
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In Van Beelen v The Queen, the High Court dismissed the appeal against conviction by the appellant, Van Beelen. Van Beelen had been convicted of murder. The Court found that the new evidence of the time of death of the victim did not require the Court to consider it as it was not fresh, compelling, substantial or highly probative. The Court held that there was no substantial miscarriage of justice in the conviction of Van Beelen and dismissed the appeal. In Thorne v Kennedy, the High Court allowed the appeal of the respondent, Kennedy. The Court found that the pre-nuptial and post-nuptial agreements between the parties were voidable as they were entered into under duress, undue influence and unconscionable conduct. The Court held that the primary judge's reasons were inadequate in determining the agreements and allowed the appeal. In HFM045 v The Republic of Nauru, the High Court allowed the appeal of the appellant, HFM045. The Court found that the Refugee Status Review Tribunal did not provide HFM045 with notice of adverse country information relevant to the Tribunal's determination on which it ultimately relied. The Court held that the failure of the Tribunal to put the substance of the information to the appellant constituted a breach of the requirements of procedural fairness and allowed the appeal.

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.