R v Will

Case

[2017] ACTSC 356

29 November 2017


Details
AGLC Case Decision Date
R v Will [2017] ACTSC 356 [2017] ACTSC 356 29 November 2017

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In the case of R v Will, the respondent applied for a permanent stay of proceedings against him on the basis that he had been compelled to give evidence before the Australian Crime Commission (ACC) under the Australian Crime Commission Act 2002. The respondent contended that the compulsory examination was unlawful, and that the use of his compelled evidence was an abuse of process, leading to a deprivation of his right to a fair trial. The respondent further argued that the ACC examination was conducted in an improper manner, with ACC investigators present, and that this rendered the examination unlawful.

The central legal issues before the court were whether the compulsory examination by the ACC was lawful and whether the derivative use of compelled evidence was an abuse of process. The court had to determine if the respondent's privilege against self-incrimination was breached and if the presence of ACC investigators during the examination was improper. Additionally, the court needed to decide if the respondent's right to a fair trial was compromised by the use of compelled evidence and if the promise not to prosecute him if he gave evidence constituted an abuse of process.

The court found that the compulsory examination was not unlawful, and the derivative use of compelled evidence did not amount to an abuse of process. The court determined that the respondent's privilege against self-incrimination was not breached, and that the presence of ACC investigators during the examination did not render it unlawful. The court also held that the respondent was not deprived of his right to a fair trial and that the promise made by the ACC did not constitute an abuse of process. Consequently, the application for a permanent stay of proceedings was dismissed, and the court ordered that necessary precautions be taken to ensure the trial would not suffer a fundamental defect.

The court further directed that the parties be heard regarding the consequential orders to be made in light of the dismissal of the stay application. This includes determining what steps need to be taken to safeguard the respondent's rights during the trial and to ensure that any evidence obtained from the ACC examination is properly managed and presented in court.
Details

Areas of Law

  • Criminal Law

  • Administrative Law

Legal Concepts

  • Jurisdiction

  • Abuse of Process

  • Legal Privilege

Actions
Download as PDF Download as Word Document


Cases Citing This Decision

18

Will v The Queen (No 2) [2021] ACTCA 14
Will v The Queen [2020] ACTCA 42
Brown v Carlini [2018] ACTMC 26
Cases Cited

76

Statutory Material Cited

18

R v Ellis [2003] NSWCCA 319