Legal Research
Cases
Medich v The Queen

Medich v The Queen

Case [2015] NSWCCA 281 13 November 2015

Type to search within this case.

Court of Criminal Appeal

Supreme Court

New South Wales

Medium Neutral Citation: MEDICH v R [2015] NSWCCA 281
Hearing dates: 18 August 2015
Date of orders: 13 November 2015
Decision date: 13 November 2015
Before: Bathurst CJ at [1]; Beazley P at [188]; Hidden J at [189]
Decision:
1 Grant the applicant leave to appeal.
2 Dismiss the appeal.
3 On the grounds referred to in s 8(1)(a) of the Court Suppression and Non-Publication Orders Act 2010 (NSW), the Court, pursuant to s 7 of that Act, orders that the judgment in this appeal and the Court’s orders are suppressed, save for the disclosure of either to the parties and their legal representatives for the purposes of the proceedings.

Catchwords: CRIMINAL LAW – appeal – murder charge - interlocutory orders – permanent or temporary stay of proceedings – where applicant examined before NSW Crime Commission – where police investigators present at examination – where prosecutors and police sent examination transcript – where examination of accused used in examination of other suspect – whether fundamental aspect of fair trial had been altered such as to warrant a stay of proceedings
Legislation Cited: Court Suppression and Non-Publication Orders Act 2010 (NSW)
Crime Commission Act 2012 (NSW)
Evidence Act 1995 (NSW)
New South Wales Crime Commission Act 1985 (NSW)
Cases Cited: Dupas v The Queen [2010] HCA 20; 241 CLR 237
House v The King [1936] HCA 40; 55 CLR 499
Jago v District Court (NSW) [1989] HCA 46; 168 CLR 23
Lee v NSW Crime Commission [2013] HCA 39; 251 CLR 196
Lee v The Queen [2014] HCA 20; 253 CLR 455
Minister for Immigration and Citizenship v Li [2013] HCA 18; 249 CLR 332
R v Edwards [2009] HCA 20; 83 ALJR 717
R v Medich (No 2) [2014] NSWSC 1313
R v MG [2007] NSWCCA 57; 69 NSWLR 20
R v Seller; R v McCarthy [2015] NSWCCA 76
R v X [2014] NSWCCA 168
Ridgeway v The Queen [1995] HCA 66; 184 CLR 19
The Queen v Glennon [1992] HCA 16; 173 CLR 592
TS v R [2014] NSWCCA 174
Walton v Gardiner [1993] HCA 77; 177 CLR 378
Warren v Coombes [1979] HCA 9; (1979) 142 CLR 531
Webb v R [2012] NSWCCA 216; 225 A Crim R 550
X7 v Australian Crime Commission [2013] HCA 29; 248 CLR 92
X7 v R [2014] NSWCCA 273
Category: Principal judgment
Parties: Ronald Edward Medich (Applicant)
Crown (Respondent)
Representation:
Counsel:
N Williams SC / A Francis / B Mostafa (Applicant)
W Abraham QC / J Davidson (Respondent)
Solicitors:
Colin Daley Quinn (Applicant)
Crown Solicitor for New South Wales (Respondent)

File Number(s): 2010/356916
Publication restriction: On the grounds referred to in s 8(1)(a) of the Court Suppression and Non-Publication Orders Act 2010 (NSW), the Court, pursuant to s 7 of that Act, orders that the judgment in this appeal and the Court’s orders are suppressed, save for the…

Grounds of appeal

[14] The appellant contends that the primary judge erred in finding that the respondent had discharged the onus of establishing the matters required under the relevant provision.

[15] It was submitted that his Honour failed to give adequate weight to the evidence of the second witness, and that the findings of fact were not reasonably open on the material before the Court.

[16] The respondent, for its part, submits that no error is disclosed, and that the conclusions reached were well within the range of outcomes available to the primary judge.

Consideration

[17] It is convenient to deal first with the question of construction, as the resolution of that issue informs the remaining grounds advanced by the appellant.

[18] For the reasons that follow, we are of the view that the appeal should be allowed in part and the matter remitted for further determination.

Continue reading Medich v The Queen

Details

AGLC: Medich v The Queen [2015] NSWCCA 281
Case: [2015] NSWCCA 281
Decision Date: 13 November 2015

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The case of Medich versus The Queen involved an appeal by the accused against the denial of an application to stay the proceedings against him on the basis of alleged unfairness in the process leading up to the trial. The accused, Medich, had been examined before the New South Wales Crime Commission, where police investigators were present. Following the examination, the transcript was sent to both the prosecutors and the police, and was later used in the examination of another suspect. Medich argued that this process had compromised the fundamental fairness of his trial, warranting either a permanent or temporary stay of proceedings. The court was tasked with determining whether the actions of the police and prosecutors had indeed breached the principles of a fair trial to the extent that a stay was warranted.

The primary legal issue before the court was whether the conduct of the police and prosecutors in handling the examination transcript of the accused had breached the principles of natural justice and fairness. The court needed to consider if the presence of police investigators during the examination, and the subsequent use of the transcript in another investigation, had altered a fundamental aspect of Medich's trial such that it warranted a stay of proceedings. The court was also required to assess whether the accused's right to a fair trial had been prejudiced by these actions.

In determining the matter, the court found that the actions of the police and prosecutors did not amount to a fundamental alteration of the trial process that would warrant a stay of proceedings. The presence of police investigators during the examination, while not ideal, did not in itself constitute a breach of natural justice. Furthermore, the court held that the use of the examination transcript in another investigation, without more, did not prejudice Medich's right to a fair trial. The court concluded that the accused had not demonstrated a sufficient breach of the principles of a fair trial to warrant either a permanent or temporary stay of proceedings. Therefore, the appeal was dismissed, and the court upheld the decision not to stay the proceedings against Medich.

Orders