FT v The King
[2024] VSCA 90
Para 5
…e more amenable to review than the principles in House v The King might suggest; cf by way of example the argument in FT (a pseudonym) v The King [2024] VSCA 90 at [49]-[64] concerning the refusal of bail. On one view, a decision to set aside a subpoena is less discretionary than a decision to refuse to order a s…
Sayer-Jones v The King
[2024] NSWCCA 54
Para 34
…Harris DCJ’s decision on 3 July 2023 refusing a permanent stay. On 22 April 2024, this Court refused leave to appeal that decision: Sayer-Jones v R [2024] NSWCCA 54.…
Koschier v R
[2024] NSWCCA 24
Para 80
…in Re in the Will of Gilbert were recently extracted with approval in the context of an interlocutory appeal in criminal proceedings in Koschier v R [2024] NSWCCA 24. In Koschier v R , Bell CJ (with whom Harrison CJ at CL and Chen J agreed) considered an interlocutory appeal under s 5F of the Criminal Appeal Act a…
R v DK
[2023] NSWCCA 281
Para 76
…As Simpson AJA recently observed in R v DK [2023] NSWCCA 281 at [3]-[32], the jurisdiction of the court under s 5F depends upon the judgment or order against which the applicant seeks leave to appeal being interlocutory in nature, and requires that the judgment or order relates to the criminal prosecution of an offe…
GLJ v The Trustees of the Roman Catholic Church for the Diocese of Lismore
[2023] HCA 32
Para 5
…poena. I mention, only for completeness, the possibility that the reasoning in GLJ v Trustees of the Roman Catholic Church for the Diocese of Lismore [2023] HCA 32; 97 ALJR 857 might suggest that the decision to set aside a subpoena is “binary” and therefore more amenable to review than the principles in House v…
Rosamond v The The King
[2022] NSWCCA 251
Para 25
…leeson CJ and Dunford J agreeing); Queanbeyan City Council v Environment Protection Authority [2011] NSWCCA 108 at [25]; Rosamond v R [2022] NSWCCA 251at [7].”…
Khanna v Woolworths Group Limited
[2022] NSWCA 94
Para 79
…As for the relevant standard of appellate review, in Khanna v Woolworths Group Ltd [2022] NSWCA 94 Gleeson JA (Leeming JA agreeing) considered an appeal against, inter alia, an interlocutory judgment given in civil proceedings in the District Court refusing leave to issue a subpoena. Gleeson JA identified the deci…
Sayer-Jones v The The Queen
[2022] NSWCCA 99
Para 32
…ay of the s 319 proceedings. That application was unsuccessful but whilst it was pending this Court granted him a temporary stay: Decision Restricted [2022] NSWCCA 99. The applicant subsequently abandoned that substantive appeal.…
R v Haque
[2022] ACTSC 10
Para 83
…the applicant pointed to a single judge decision in the Australian Capital Territory in which Buss J’s seventh point has been endorsed ( R v Haque [2022] ACTSC 10) and another in which it has not ( R v Carpenter [2022] ACTSC 6). He also relied on the observations of Adams J in R v Wong to suggest there was confli…
R v Carpenter
[2022] ACTSC 6
Para 83
…an Capital Territory in which Buss J’s seventh point has been endorsed ( R v Haque [2022] ACTSC 10) and another in which it has not ( R v Carpenter [2022] ACTSC 6). He also relied on the observations of Adams J in R v Wong to suggest there was conflicting authority in NSW on this issue. Despite this, he did not p…
Secretary of the Department of Planning, Industry and Environment v Blacktown City Council
[2021] NSWCA 145
Para 84
…f the evidence to be adduced by the prospective witnesses: Secretary of the Department of Planning, Industry and Environment v Blacktown City Council [2021] NSWCA 145 at [65] per Bell CJ.…
O'Haire v Barnes, Chief Regulatory Officer, Natural Resources Access Regulator
[2020] NSWCCA 19
Para 48
…to cause irregularity or injustice’ (emphasis added): O’Haire v Barnes, Chief Regulatory Officer, Natural Resources Access Regulator [2020] NSWCCA 19 at [48] quoting R v Van Phu Ho (Court of Criminal Appeal (NSW), 18 July 1994, unrep) (Mahoney JA, Gleeson CJ and Dunford J agreeing); Queanbeyan City Council v Envir…
Sayer-Jones v Director of Public Prosecutions (NSW)
[2019] NSWSC 1615
Para 28
…gh Court in Jamieson. Her Honour delivered her reasons two days later on 21 November 2019 : Sayer-Jones v The Director of Public Prosecutions (NSW) [2019] NSWSC 1615.…
Regina v Obeid
[2018] NSWSC 1024
Para 77
…An order setting aside a subpoena falls within the scope of s 5F; Beech-Jones J observed the following in that regard in R v Obeid [2018] NSWSC 1024 at [44]:…
Rohan v R
[2018] NSWCCA 89
Para 78
…Similarly, in Rohan v R [2018] NSWCCA 89 this Court considered an application for leave to appeal against the refusal of a trial judge to grant leave to issue a subpoena for production under s 298 of the Criminal Procedure Act 1986 (NSW).…
Director of Public Prosecutions (Cth) v Pratten (No 2)
[2017] NSWCCA 42
Para 49
…SW. The Crown relies on the decisions in R v Donald [2013] NSWCCA 238 and Director of Public Prosecutions (Cth) v Pratten (No 2) (2017) 94 NSWLR 194; [2017] NSWCCA 42 in support of that position.…
Coles v R
[2016] NSWCCA 32
Para 54
…ns: Sabra v R , R v Todd , R v Blanco , R v Schwabegger , R v Gay , Scook v R , Mill v R [1988] HCA 70, King v R (1998) 99 A Crim R 288 and Coles v R [2016] NSWCCA 32. Her Honour then went on to state the following:…
Sabra v R
[2015] NSWCCA 38
Para 44
…More recently in Sabra v R [2015] NSWCCA 38; (2015) 257 A Crim R 33, the court held (at [44]-[46]) that the sentencing judge had erred in finding that despite the offender suffering anxiety and concern over the delay, greater consequences needed to be established before the delay could be taken into account.…
R v Liang
[2014] QCA 87
…“… Delay which is not attributable to the offender, of course, constitutes ‘a powerful mitigatory factor.’: R v Liang and Li (1995) 124 FLR 350 at 356; 82 A Crim R 39 at 45. It can have relevance at a number of levels. In Duncan v R (1983) 47 ALR 746; 9 A Crim R 354 the Court of Criminal Appeal of Western Australia s…
R v Donald
[2013] NSWCCA 238
Para 49
…mits that the seventh factor identified by Buss JA is plainly wrong and has not been followed in NSW. The Crown relies on the decisions in R v Donald [2013] NSWCCA 238 and Director of Public Prosecutions (Cth) v Pratten (No 2) (2017) 94 NSWLR 194; [2017] NSWCCA 42 in support of that position.…
Giourtalis v R
[2013] NSWCCA 216
…ideration of the issue of delay in Fahda, Khoury , Blanco, Barker & Gibson, TJ v R [2009] NSWCCA 99, Tourni v R [2010] NSWCCA 317 or Giourtalis v R [2013] NSWCCA 216 that departs from the summary set out above in Scook , with the exception of the last factor (a mitigated penalty as a mark of disapproval of tardy pro…
Dao v R
[2011] NSWCCA 183
Para 81
…ions remain apposite, as has been recognised in a number of decisions which have involved s 5F of the Criminal Appeal Act including DAO v The Queen (2011) 81 NSWLR 568; [2011] NSWCCA 63 at [76] (“ DAO ”). As for the relevant factors to have regard to when considering whether leave ought to be granted, Bell CJ summaris…
Queanbeyan City Council v Environment Protection Authority
[2011] NSWCCA 108
Para 25
…SW), 18 July 1994, unrep) (Mahoney JA, Gleeson CJ and Dunford J agreeing); Queanbeyan City Council v Environment Protection Authority [2011] NSWCCA 108 at [25]; Rosamond v R [2022] NSWCCA 251at [7].”…
Dao v The Queen
[2011] NSWCCA 63
Para 81
…as has been recognised in a number of decisions which have involved s 5F of the Criminal Appeal Act including DAO v The Queen (2011) 81 NSWLR 568; [2011] NSWCCA 63 at [76] (“ DAO ”). As for the relevant factors to have regard to when considering whether leave ought to be granted, Bell CJ summarised the various tes…
Tourni v R
[2010] NSWCCA 317
…here is nothing in this Court's consideration of the issue of delay in Fahda, Khoury , Blanco, Barker & Gibson, TJ v R [2009] NSWCCA 99, Tourni v R [2010] NSWCCA 317 or Giourtalis v R [2013] NSWCCA 216 that departs from the summary set out above in Scook , with the exception of the last factor (a mitigated penalty a…
Blanco, Barker & Gibson, TJ v R
[2009] NSWCCA 99
…“There is nothing in this Court's consideration of the issue of delay in Fahda, Khoury , Blanco, Barker & Gibson, TJ v R [2009] NSWCCA 99, Tourni v R [2010] NSWCCA 317 or Giourtalis v R [2013] NSWCCA 216 that departs from the summary set out above in Scook , with the exception of the last factor (a mitigated penalt…
R v Wong
[2002] NSWCCA 527
Para 71
…itten submissions but then proceeded to make further submissions including reliance upon the decision of Adams J in R v Wong (2002) 137 A Crim R 120; [2002] NSWCCA 527.…
R v Gay
[2002] NSWCCA 6
Para 42
…o an element of leniency, including when an offender may have been left in uncertain suspense: R v Blanco [1999] NSWCCA 121 at [11], [16]. In R v Gay [2002] NSWCCA 6; (2002) 49 ATR 78, Mason P (with whom R S Hulme and Hidden JJ agreed) cited with approval the decision of the Victorian Court of Appeal in R v Schwab…
R v Karageorge
[1999] NSWCCA 213
Para 16
…Reference should also be made R v Karageorge (1998) 146 FLR 100; (1998) 103 A Crim R 157 relied upon by the applicant. Levine J (Sully and Simpson JJ agreeing), albeit obiter dictum , with regard to “a completely unexplained delay” of three years between the detection of the offending and the charging of the appellan…
R v Blanco
[1999] NSWCCA 121
Para 42
…ces in which delay can entitle an offender to an element of leniency, including when an offender may have been left in uncertain suspense: R v Blanco [1999] NSWCCA 121 at [11], [16]. In R v Gay [2002] NSWCCA 6; (2002) 49 ATR 78, Mason P (with whom R S Hulme and Hidden JJ agreed) cited with approval the decision of t…
Pearce v The Queen
[1998] HCA 57
Para 42
…TR 78, Mason P (with whom R S Hulme and Hidden JJ agreed) cited with approval the decision of the Victorian Court of Appeal in R v Schwabegger [1998] 4 VR 649; (1997) 38 ATR 30. That case concerned a lengthy and substantially unexplained delay between detection and prosecution coupled with the payment by th…
Jamieson v The Queen
[1993] HCA 48
Para 25
…sis that the facts alleged against him did not amount to an offence under s 192E(1)(b) given the decision in Jamieson v The Queen (1993) 177 CLR 574; [1993] HCA 48 (“ Jamieson ”).…
Mill v The Queen
[1988] HCA 70
…CLR 574; [1993] HCA 48 Khanna v Woolworths Group Ltd [2022] NSWCA 94 King v R (1998) 99 A Crim R 288 Koschier v R [2024] NSWCCA 24 Mill v R (1988) 166 CLR 59; [1988] HCA 70 R v Blanco [1999] NSWCCA 121; (1999) 106 A Crim R 303 R v Carpenter [2022] ACTSC 6 R v DK [2023] NSWCCA 281 R v Donald [2013] NSWCCA 238 R v Gay…
House v R
[1936] HCA 40
Para 79
…s discretionary in nature and noted that the applicant did not identify any House v The King error: House v The King (1936) 55 CLR 499 at 504 to 505; [1936] HCA 40. Gleeson JA also noted (at [20]) that the court exercises great restraint in interfering with an interlocutory decision on a matter of practice and p…
House v The King
63 WN 176
Para 79
…e a subpoena. Gleeson JA identified the decision as discretionary in nature and noted that the applicant did not identify any House v The King error: House v The King (1936) 55 CLR 499 at 504 to 505; [1936] HCA 40. Gleeson JA also noted (at [20]) that the court exercises great restraint in interfering with an interlocutor…