Legal Research
Cases
Tieleman v The Queen

Tieleman v The Queen

Case [2004] WASCA 285 29 November 2004

Appeal

Bail

Prospects of Success on Appeal

Criminal Law

No judgment structure available for this case.

Type to search within this case.

TIELEMAN & ANOR -v- THE QUEEN [2004] WASCA 285

Jurisdiction:	SUPREME COURT OF WESTERN AUSTRALIA	Citation No:	[2004] WASCA 285
Court:	THE FULL COURT (WA)	Published:	29/11/2004
Case No:	FUL:122/2004	Heard:	9 SEPTEMBER 2004
Coram:	MURRAY J STEYTLER J TEMPLEMAN J	Delivered:	9/09/04
No of pages:	18	Judgment Part:	1 of 1
Result:	Appeals dismissed
Category:	A
PDF Version

Parties:	WALTER JOHN TIELEMAN THE QUEEN SEAN PEARCE
Catchwords:	Criminal law and procedure Bail Application for bail pending appeal Necessity to show "exceptional reasons" why appellant should not be kept in custody Prospects of success on appeal Other circumstances discussed Whether exceptional reasons may be found in a combination of circumstances individually insufficient
Legislation:	Bail Act 1982 (WA), Sch 1 Pt C cl 4
Case References:	Baker v R (2004) 78 ALJR 1483 Caratti v The Queen [1999] WASCA 91 Chamberlain v R (No 1) (1983) 153 CLR 514 Clark v The Queen [2004] WASCA 91 Ex p Maher [1986] 1 QdR 303 Jemielita v R (1994) 12 WAR 362 Lim v Gregson [1989] WAR 1 Marotta v R (1999) 73 ALJR 265 R v Baker (2002) 130 A Crim R 417 R v Kelly (Edward) [2000] QB 198 Stalker v The Queen [2002] WASCA 364 Tieleman v The Queen [2004] WASCA 164 United Mexican States v Cabal (2001) 209 CLR 165 Draper v The Queen [2000] WASCA 160 Duke v The Queen [1999] WASCA 215 Macleod v The Queen (2003) 197 ALR 333 Peters v The Queen (1998) 192 CLR 493 R v Bernt (1994) 70 A Crim R 1 R v Ianelli (2003) 139 A Crim R 1 R v Kastratovic (1985) 19 A Crim R 28 R v Kennedy (2000) 118 A Crim R 34 R v MRW (1999) 113 A Crim R 308 R v Southgate [1960] NSWR 477 R v Wilson (1994) 73 A Crim R 532 R v Wood [1974] VR 117 Robinson v The Queen (1991) 65 ALJR 519 Tieleman v The Queen [2004] WASCA 164 Tran v The Queen, unreported; SCt of WA; Library No 990117; 11 March 1999 Wills v Petroulias (2003) 204 ALR 162

JURISDICTION : SUPREME COURT OF WESTERN AUSTRALIA TITLE OF COURT : THE FULL COURT (WA) CITATION : TIELEMAN & ANOR -v- THE QUEEN [2004] WASCA 285 CORAM : MURRAY J

STEYTLER J

TEMPLEMAN J

HEARD : 9 SEPTEMBER 2004 DELIVERED : 9 SEPTEMBER 2004 PUBLISHED : 29 NOVEMBER 2004 FILE NO/S : FUL 122 of 2004 BETWEEN : WALTER JOHN TIELEMAN

Appellant

AND

THE QUEEN

Respondent

FILE NO/S : FUL 123 of 2004 BETWEEN : SEAN PEARCE

Appellant

AND

THE QUEEN

Respondent

(Page 2)

ON APPEAL FROM:

Jurisdiction : SUPREME COURT OF WESTERN AUSTRALIA

Coram : ROBERTS-SMITH J

Citation : TIELEMAN -v- THE QUEEN [2004] WASCA 164

File No : CCA 112 of 2004, CCA 110 of 2004

Catchwords:

Criminal law and procedure - Bail - Application for bail pending appeal - Necessity to show "exceptional reasons" why appellant should not be kept in custody - Prospects…

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 Tieleman v The Queen

Details

AGLC: Tieleman v The Queen [2004] WASCA 285
Case: [2004] WASCA 285
Decision Date: 29 NOVEMBER 2004

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The appellant, Tieleman, sought bail pending an appeal against his conviction for drug-related offences. The application was heard by the High Court of Australia, which had to determine whether the appellant had demonstrated "exceptional reasons" to warrant bail while awaiting the appeal. The legal issue centred on whether the appellant had established a sufficient basis for being granted bail, considering the gravity of the charges and the need for the appellant to be held in custody pending the appeal. The court assessed the appellant's prospects of success on appeal, as well as other circumstances that could influence the decision. It examined whether a combination of circumstances, individually insufficient, could constitute exceptional reasons for bail. The High Court concluded that the appellant had not demonstrated exceptional reasons warranting bail, and therefore dismissed the appeal. The orders of the court were that the appeals be dismissed.

Orders

Orders of the court

Appeals dismissed

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.

Citations

AGLC Citation

Tieleman v The Queen [2004] WASCA 285

Most Recent Citation

Riley v The State of Western Australia [2009] WASC 366

Cases citing this decision · 50 of 52 shown

LMN v Director of Public Prosecutions
[2025] WASC 275 Para 8

…think it to be clear that what may constitute exceptional reasons will depend upon the facts of the particular case.[83] [82] Tieleman v The Queen [2004] WASCA 285; (2004) 149 A Crim R 303. [83] Tieleman v The Queen [15]. See also Steytler J [46], and Mazza J in Shrivastava v State of Western Australia [2010] WASC…
RT v MW
[2023] WADC 148 Para 2

…hat are unusual, out of the ordinary, in some way special, or an exception to the general run of cases.[55] [55] See for example Tieleman v The Queen [2004] WASCA 285 [15] (Murray J, Steytler & Templeman JJ agreeing); Roberts v The State of Western Australia [2011] WASC 118; The State of Western Australia v Roworth…
Bice v The State of Western Australia
[2022] WASC 466 Para 1

…he circumstances as a whole, weighing competing factors in determining whether exceptional reasons have been established.[6] [1] Tieleman v The Queen [2004] WASCA 285; (2004) 49 A Crim R 303 [15]; Shrivastava v The State of Western Australia [2010] WASCA 96 ( Shrivastava ) [28] - [32]; De Faria v The Queen [2012] W…
Kember v The Queen
[2022] ACTCA 51

…nt is required to show that the appeal is “most likely to succeed” which would be required to meet the test of exceptional circumstances: Tieleman v The Queen (2004) 149 A Crim R 303. Very strong grounds must be shown, sometimes referred to as “virtually certain of success” ( R v Waters (at 4018)) or “extraordinarily high pro…
Warne v The Queen
[2022] ACTCA 35

…ed to show that the appeal is “most likely to succeed” which would be required to meet the test of exceptional circumstances: Tieleman v The Queen (2004) 149 A Crim R 303. Very strong grounds must be shown, sometimes referred to as “virtually certain of success” ( R v Waters (at 4018)) or “extraordinarily high prospects of su…
Dick v The State of Western Australia
[2021] WASC 292 Para 1

…circumstances as a whole, weighing competing factors in determining whether exceptional reasons have been established.[20] [17] Tieleman v The Queen [2004] WASCA 285; (2004) 49 A Crim R 303 [15] (Murray J); Shrivastava v The State of Western Australia [2010] WASCA 96 [28] - [32] (Mazza JA); De Faria v the Queen [2…
Dickerson v The State of Western Australia
[2020] WASC 425 Para 1

…he circumstances as a whole, weighing competing factors in determining whether exceptional reasons have been established.[9] [6] Tieleman v The Queen [2004] WASCA 285; (2004) 49 A Crim R 303 [15] (Murray J); Shrivastava v The State of Western Australia [2010] WASCA 96 [28] ‑ [32] (Mazza JA); De Faria v the Queen [2…
Smart v The State of Western Australia
[2018] WASC 336 Para 1

…to which it is applied is unusual or out of the ordinary, in some way special or an exception to the general run of cases. [29] Tieleman v The Queen [2004] WASCA 285; (2004) 49 A Crim R 303 [15].…
Annakin v Western Australia Police
[2020] WASC 277 Para 1

…e circumstances as a whole, weighing competing factors in determining whether exceptional reasons have been established.[10] [7] Tieleman v The Queen [2004] WASCA 285; (2004) 49 A Crim R 303 [15] (Murray J); Shrivastava v The State of Western Australia [2010] WASCA 96 [28] - [32] (Mazza JA); De Faria v the Queen [2…
Parnell v The State of Western Australia
[2020] WASC 143 Para 1

…e circumstances as a whole, weighing competing factors in determining whether exceptional reasons have been established.[10] [7] Tieleman v The Queen [2004] WASCA 285; (2004) 49 A Crim R 303 [15] (Murray J); Shrivastava v The State of Western Australia [2010] WASCA 96 [28] ‑ [32] (Mazza JA); De Faria v the Queen [2…
Hishmeh v State of Western Australia
[2019] WASC 188 Para 10

…a murder case must be 'unusual or out of the ordinary, in some way special or an exception to the general run of cases'.[2] [2] Tieleman v The Queen [2004] WASCA 285 [15]; (2004) 49 A Crim R 303 (Murray J); Bertolami v The State of Western Australia [2009] WASC 269 [8] (Hall J).…
Hampton v The State of Western Australia
[2019] WASC 129 Para 5

…pend on the facts in each particular case.' [6] EAGD v The State of Western Australia [2013] WASCA 81 [8] (Mazza JA). See also Tieleman v The Queen [2004] WASCA 285; (2004) 149 A Crim R 303 [15] (Murray J), and [46], [48] (Steytler J).…
Fisher v The State of Western Australia
[2018] WASC 322 Para 1

…g to which it is applied is unusual or out of the ordinary, in some way special or an exception to the general run of cases. [2] Tieleman v The Queen [2004] WASCA 285; (2004) 49 A Crim R 303. [3] Tieleman v The Queen [15].…
Di Fazio v The State of Western Australia
[2016] WASC 273

…The State of Western Australia [2011] WASC 118 The State of Western Australia v Sturgeon [2005] WASC 256 Tieleman v The Queen (2004) 49 A Crim R 303; [2004] WASCA 285…
Robinson v The State of Western Australia
[2016] WASC 148 Para 1

…unusual or out of the ordinary, in some way special or an exception to the general run of cases.[2] [2] Tieleman v The Queen (2004) 49 A Crim R 303; [2004] WASCA 285 [15] (Murray J).…
ABM v The State of Western Australia
[2014] WASC 424

…] WASCA 99; (2011) 42 WAR 99 Ribot-Cabrera v The Queen [2004] WASCA 101 Roberts v The State of Western Australia [2011] WASC 118 Tieleman v The Queen [2004] WASCA 285; (2004) 149 A Crim R 303…
The Commissioner of Police v Wilson
[2014] WADC 101

…nway; Police v Parker (2006) SASC 186 Project Blue Sky Inc v Australian Broadcasting Authority [1998] HCA 28; (1998) 194 CLR 355 Tieleman v The Queen [2004] WASCA 285 Zheng v Cai [2009] HCA 32; (2009) 239 CLR 446…
Soliman v The State of Western Australia
[2014] WASC 262

…he State of Western Australia [2013] WASC 338 The State of Western Australia v Marchese [2006] WASCA 153 Tieleman v The Queen (2004) 49 A Crim R 303; [2004] WASCA 285 Tregurtha v The Queen [2002] WASC 311 Williams v The Queen [2001] WASC 308 Wright v The Queen [2000] WASCA 236…
Jones v The State of Western Australia
[2014] WASC 234

…010] WASC 238 Roberts v The State of Western Australia [2011] WASC 118 The State of Western Australia v Sturgeon [2005] WASC 256 Tieleman v The Queen [2004] WASCA 285; (2004) 149 A Crim R 303…
Judgment Suppressed
[2013] WASC 338

…Tieleman v The Queen [2004] WASCA 285; 149 A Crim R 303…
Leeder v The State of Western Australia
[2012] WASC 441 Para 16

…atters are readily to be seen, or indeed in the final analysis are to be seen, as 'exceptional reasons'. I note for that purpose Tieleman v The Queen [2004] WASCA 285; (2004) 49 A Crim R 303, referred to in Roberts v The State of Western Australia [2011] WASC 118, which it seems to me requires I attend to the ordin…
Seong Won Lee and Do Young Lee v Regina
[2012] NSWSC 1168 Para 1

…In the latter case Basten JA observed that the approach adopted in Cabal has been applied by the Court of Appeal in Western Australia in Tieleman v R [2004] WASCA 285; (2004) 149 A Crim R 303. His Honour stated that although the principles enunciated by the High Court involve no statutory test, but rather an applic…
Colwell v The State of Western Australia
[2012] WASCA 149

…Shrivastava v The State of Western Australia [2010] WASCA 96 Tieleman v The Queen (2004) 149 A Crim R 303…
Allbeury v Corruption and Crime Commission
[2012] WASCA 84 Para 18

…In Tieleman v The Queen [2004] WASCA 285, Murray J (Templeman J agreeing) said, in the context of appeals against a decision of a Supreme Court judge refusing bail: The appeals against the decisions made by Roberts-Smith J were undoubtedly competent: Jemielita v The Queen (1994) 12 WAR 362, applying Lim v Gregson […
Goodwyn v The State of Western Australia
[2011] WASC 328 Para 5

…justifying a grant of bail in a murder case must be unusual and out of the ordinary; in some way special or an exception to the general run of cases: Tieleman v The Queen (2004) 149 A Crim R 303 [15] (Murray J); Bertolami v The State of Western Australia [2009] WASC 269 [6] (Hall J).…
Sherd v The Queen
[2011] ACTCA 17 Para 1

…applicant is required to show that the appeal is “most likely to succeed” which would be required to meet the test of exceptional circumstances: Tieleman v The Queen (2004) 149 A Crim R 303. Very strong grounds must be shown, sometimes referred to as “virtually certain of success” ( R v Waters (at 4018)) or “extraordinarily…
Timothy James West v The Queen
[2011] ACTCA 21 Para 1

…es v Cabal and Ors , this is not necessarily required in every case, as what is special or exceptional will depend on the facts of a particular case: Tieleman v The Queen (2004) 149 A Crim R 303 (at 308). Even though strong prospects of success is not an essential criterion in every case, however, prospects of success will al…
Aldridge v The Queen
[2011] ACTCA 20 Para 1

…es v Cabal and Ors , this is not necessarily required in every case, as what is special or exceptional will depend on the facts of a particular case: Tieleman v The Queen (2004) 149 A Crim R 303 (at 308). Even though strong prospects of success is not an essential criterion in every case, however, prospects of success will al…
David John Welch v The Queen
[2011] ACTCA 19

…applicant is required to show that the appeal is ‘most likely to succeed’ which would be required to meet the test of exceptional circumstances: Tieleman v The Queen (2004) 149 A Crim R 303. Very strong grounds must be shown, sometimes referred to as ‘virtually certain of success’ ( R v Waters (at 4018)) or ‘extraordinarily…
Hedgeland v The State of Western Australia
[2011] WASC 181 Para 12

…s in combination, must be able to be described as exceptional, in the ordinary meaning of the word. In Tieleman v The Queen (2004) 49 A Crim R 303; [2004] WASCA 285, 306 [15], I said (Steytler & Templeman JJ agreeing): '"Exceptional" is an ordinary adjective denoting that the thing to which it is applied is unusual…
Neumann v The State of Western Australia
[2011] WASC 173 Para 1

…s in combination, must be able to be described as exceptional, in the ordinary meaning of the word. In Tieleman v The Queen (2004) 49 A Crim R 303; [2004] WASCA 285, 306 [15], I said (Steytler & Templeman JJ agreeing): ''Exceptional' is an ordinary adjective denoting that the thing to which it is applied is unusual…
Roberts v The State of Western Australia
[2011] WASC 118 Para 5

…In Tieleman v The Queen (2004) 49 A Crim R 303; [2004] WASCA 285, 306 [15], I said (Steytler & Templeman JJ agreeing): 'Exceptional' is an ordinary adjective denoting that the thing to which it is applied is unusual or out of the ordinary, in some way special or an exception to the general run of cases. I remain of…
Rafidi v The State of Western Australia
[2011] WASC 95 Para 15

…Tieleman v The Queen (2004) 49 A Crim R 303; [2004] WASCA 285 was a case of an application for bail pending appeal, in which exceptional reasons had to be shown, pursuant to the provisions of cl 4 of Pt C of Sch 1 to the Act, the forerunner of the present cl 4A in relation to bail after conviction and pending appea…
Shrivastava v The State of Western Australia
[2010] WASCA 96 Para 3

…In Tieleman v The Queen (2004) 149 A Crim R 303 [15], Murray J said that the word 'exceptional' denoted that the thing to which it is applied is unusual or out of the ordinary, in some way special or an exception to the general run of cases.…
Ward v The State of Western Australia
[2010] WASCA 64 Para 4

…l force to cl 4A. As the appellant has also pointed out, the question of exceptional circumstances was considered in the case of Tieleman v The Queen [2004] WASCA 285 [30], [48] where it was said that the phrase 'exceptional reasons' bears its ordinary meaning; that is, as something 'unusual or extraordinary or spe…
Riley v The State of Western Australia
[2009] WASC 366

…e of Western Australia [2009] WASC 269 Outman v The Queen [2001] WASC 162 The State of Western Australia v Oates [2004] WASC 214 Tieleman v The Queen [2004] WASCA 285; (2004) 149 A Crim R 303…
Bropho v The State of Western Australia
[2009] WASCA 12

…[2005] WASCA 107 Lim v Gregson [1989] WAR 1 R v Jeffers (1895) 1 ALR 71 R v Kennedy [1941] QWN 49 R v Kleinert (1928) 49 ALT 137 Tieleman v The Queen [2004] WASCA 285; (2004) 149 A Crim R 303…
Dunstan v The State of Western Australia
[2008] WASCA 270 Para 2

…ranted bail, the appellant must show exceptional reasons. The governing authority which sets out the principles to be applied is Tieleman v The Queen [2004] WASCA 285; (2004) 149 A Crim R 303. Murray J, at [24], set out what I consider to be the appropriate considerations. He said: [S]peaking generally, ... it will…
In the matter of an application for bail by PAUL HENDERSON
[2008] ACTSC 109

…Tieleman & Anor v The Queen [2004] WASCA 285 (9 September 2004)…
Lunam v The State of Western Australia
[2007] WASCA 73 Para 17

…In N v The State of Western Australia [2006] WASCA 276 I made the following observations at [33] and [34]: "In R v Tieleman (2004) 149 A Crim R 303, Murray J (with whom Templeman J agreed) said that in the context of an argument that the prospects of the appeal succeeding constitute exceptional reasons, bail would be…
"LJW" v The State of Western Australia
[2007] WASCA 68

…[2005] WASCA 193; (2005) 30 WAR 473 Scott v The State of Western Australia (2006) WASCA 28 Stalker v The Queen (2002) WASCA 364 Tieleman v The Queen [2004] WASCA 285; (2004) 149 A Crim R 303…
Collins v The State of Western Australia
[2006] WASCA 280

…SCt of WA; Library No 920397; 21 July 1992 Stewart (1994) 72 A Crim R 17 Thill v Ryan, unreported; CCA SCt of WA; Library No 920689; 18 December 1992 Tieleman v The Queen (2004) 149 A Crim R 303 Van de Heuval (1992) 63 A Crim R 75 Warrell v Kay (1995) 83 A Crim R 493 Webb v Baldwin, unreported; CCA SCt of WA; Library No 97001…
Bradley v The State of Western Australia
[2006] WASCA 277

…ern Australia (2005) 30 WAR 473 Shepherd v The Queen, unreported; CCA SCt of WA; Library No 920397; 21 July 1992 Stalker v The Queen [2002] WASCA 364 Tieleman v The Queen (2004) 149 A Crim R 303 Caratti v The Queen, unreported; CCA SCt of WA; Library No 980306; 9 June 1998 Chan (1989) 38 A Crim R 337 Duke v The Queen [2002] W…
"N" v The State of Western Australia
[2006] WASCA 276

…33 In R v Tieleman (2004) 149 A Crim R 303, Murray J (with whom Templeman J agreed) said that in the context of an argument that the prospects of the appeal succeeding constitute exceptional reasons, bail would be granted ordinarily only if the appellant could demonstrate there were "strong grounds for concluding the…
Lowenstein v The State of Western Australia
[2006] WASCA 212 Para 9

…t is required to demonstrate reasons which are unusual or out of the ordinary or in some way special or an exception to the general run of cases (see Tieleman v The Queen (2004) 149 A Crim R 303 at [14] ‑ [15], [24], [42], [46], [48] and [51]).…
Director of Public Prosecutions (Cth) v Cassaniti
[2006] NSWSC 1103

…4) 34 NSWLR 1 Roberts and Lardner (1997) 97 A Crim R 456 Sinanovic v R (No. 1) (2001) 179 ALR 520 Tieleman v The Queen (2004) 149 A Crim R 303; [2004] WASCA 285 United Mexican States v Cabal (2002) 209 CLR 165 Velevski (2000) 117 A Crim R 30 PARTIES: Director of Public Prosecutions (Cth) - Appellant Salvatore Peter…
Ranford v The State of Western Australia
[2006] WASCA 134

…The Queen (1997) 189 CLR 295 R v Swain [1999] WASCA 22 Rauhina v The Queen [2002] WASCA 91 Samuels v The State of Western Australia (2005) 30 WAR 473 Tieleman v The Queen (2004) 149 A Crim R 303 United Mexican States v Cabal (2001) 209 CLR 165 Wright v The Queen, unreported; CCA SCt of WA; Library No 920531; 20 August 1992 De…
Yazdani & Chopra v The State of Western Australia
[2005] WASCA 255 Para 8

…kely to have been substantially served before the appeal is determined (see United Mexican States v Cabal (2001) 209 CLR 165 and Tieleman v The Queen [2004] WASCA 285).…
Hodder v The State of Western Australia
[2005] WASCA 243 Para 18

…hown; it must be shown without detailed argument that the appeal is most likely to succeed ( Stalker v The Queen [2002] WASCA 364 at [19] - [40]). In R v Tieleman (2004) 149 A Crim R 303, Murray J (with whom Steytler and Templeman JJ agreed), in discussing the prospects of the appeal succeeding in the context of excep…
Duong v The State of Western Australia
[2005] WASCA 148 Para 11

…monstrated is that the appeal is most likely to succeed. This view was endorsed by the Full Court of Western Australia in Tieleman & Anor v The Queen [2004] WASCA 285. Murray J, with whom Steytler and Templeman JJ agreed, said the extent to which the custodial part of the sentence was likely to have been served bef…

View all 52 citing cases →

Cases cited in this decision · 16 of 16 shown

Baker v The Queen
[2004] HCA 45

…25 Finally, I wish to refer to Baker v The Queen (2004) 78 ALJR 1483. An appeal to the High Court from the NSW Court of Criminal Appeal, the decision of which court is reported as R v Baker (2002) 130 A Crim R 417. The case concerns a statutory procedure under the Sentencing Act 1989 (NSW) whereby persons who have been sen…
Tieleman v The Queen
[2004] WASCA 164

…a v R (1999) 73 ALJR 265 R v Baker (2002) 130 A Crim R 417 R v Kelly (Edward) [2000] QB 198 Stalker v The Queen [2002] WASCA 364 Tieleman v The Queen [2004] WASCA 164 United Mexican States v Cabal (2001) 209 CLR 165 Draper v The Queen [2000] WASCA 160 Duke v The Queen [1999] WASCA 215 Macleod v The Queen (2003) 197…
Clark v The Queen
[2004] WASCA 91

…Baker v R (2004) 78 ALJR 1483 Caratti v The Queen [1999] WASCA 91 Chamberlain v R (No 1) (1983) 153 CLR 514 Clark v The Queen [2004] WASCA 91 Ex p Maher [1986] 1 QdR 303 Jemielita v R (1994) 12 WAR 362 Lim v Gregson [1989] WAR 1 Marotta v R (1999) 73 ALJR 265 R v Baker (2002) 130 A Crim R 417 R v Kelly (Edward) [2…
Wills v Petroulias
[2003] NSWCA 390

…(1991) 65 ALJR 519 Tieleman v The Queen [2004] WASCA 164 Tran v The Queen, unreported; SCt of WA; Library No 990117; 11 March 1999 Wills v Petroulias (2003) 204 ALR 162…
Macleod v the Queen
[2003] HCA 24

…WASCA 164 United Mexican States v Cabal (2001) 209 CLR 165 Draper v The Queen [2000] WASCA 160 Duke v The Queen [1999] WASCA 215 Macleod v The Queen (2003) 197 ALR 333 Peters v The Queen (1998) 192 CLR 493 R v Bernt (1994) 70 A Crim R 1 R v Ianelli (2003) 139 A Crim R 1 R v Kastratovic (1985) 19 A Crim R 28 R v Kenn…
Stalker v The Queen
[2002] WASCA 364

…362 Lim v Gregson [1989] WAR 1 Marotta v R (1999) 73 ALJR 265 R v Baker (2002) 130 A Crim R 417 R v Kelly (Edward) [2000] QB 198 Stalker v The Queen [2002] WASCA 364 Tieleman v The Queen [2004] WASCA 164 United Mexican States v Cabal (2001) 209 CLR 165 Draper v The Queen [2000] WASCA 160 Duke v The Queen [1999] WA…
United Mexican States v Cabal
[2001] HCA 60

…Crim R 417 R v Kelly (Edward) [2000] QB 198 Stalker v The Queen [2002] WASCA 364 Tieleman v The Queen [2004] WASCA 164 United Mexican States v Cabal (2001) 209 CLR 165 Draper v The Queen [2000] WASCA 160 Duke v The Queen [1999] WASCA 215 Macleod v The Queen (2003) 197 ALR 333 Peters v The Queen (1998) 192 CLR 493 R…
Draper v The Queen
[2000] WASCA 160

…QB 198 Stalker v The Queen [2002] WASCA 364 Tieleman v The Queen [2004] WASCA 164 United Mexican States v Cabal (2001) 209 CLR 165 Draper v The Queen [2000] WASCA 160 Duke v The Queen [1999] WASCA 215 Macleod v The Queen (2003) 197 ALR 333 Peters v The Queen (1998) 192 CLR 493 R v Bernt (1994) 70 A Crim R 1 R v Ian…
Duke v The Queen
[1999] WASCA 215

…WASCA 364 Tieleman v The Queen [2004] WASCA 164 United Mexican States v Cabal (2001) 209 CLR 165 Draper v The Queen [2000] WASCA 160 Duke v The Queen [1999] WASCA 215 Macleod v The Queen (2003) 197 ALR 333 Peters v The Queen (1998) 192 CLR 493 R v Bernt (1994) 70 A Crim R 1 R v Ianelli (2003) 139 A Crim R 1 R v Kas…
Caratti v The Queen
[1999] WASCA 91

…Baker v R (2004) 78 ALJR 1483 Caratti v The Queen [1999] WASCA 91 Chamberlain v R (No 1) (1983) 153 CLR 514 Clark v The Queen [2004] WASCA 91 Ex p Maher [1986] 1 QdR 303 Jemielita v R (1994) 12 WAR 362 Lim v Gregson [1989] WAR 1 Marotta v R (1999) 73 ALJR 265 R v Baker (2002) 130 A Crim R 417 R v Kelly (Edward) [2…
Marotta v The Queen
[1999] HCA 4

…983) 153 CLR 514 Clark v The Queen [2004] WASCA 91 Ex p Maher [1986] 1 QdR 303 Jemielita v R (1994) 12 WAR 362 Lim v Gregson [1989] WAR 1 Marotta v R (1999) 73 ALJR 265 R v Baker (2002) 130 A Crim R 417 R v Kelly (Edward) [2000] QB 198 Stalker v The Queen [2002] WASCA 364 Tieleman v The Queen [2004] WASCA 164 United…
Peters v the Queen
[1998] HCA 7

…al (2001) 209 CLR 165 Draper v The Queen [2000] WASCA 160 Duke v The Queen [1999] WASCA 215 Macleod v The Queen (2003) 197 ALR 333 Peters v The Queen (1998) 192 CLR 493 R v Bernt (1994) 70 A Crim R 1 R v Ianelli (2003) 139 A Crim R 1 R v Kastratovic (1985) 19 A Crim R 28 R v Kennedy (2000) 118 A Crim R 34 R v MRW (19…
Jemielita v The Queen
[1994] HCATrans 51

…tti v The Queen [1999] WASCA 91 Chamberlain v R (No 1) (1983) 153 CLR 514 Clark v The Queen [2004] WASCA 91 Ex p Maher [1986] 1 QdR 303 Jemielita v R (1994) 12 WAR 362 Lim v Gregson [1989] WAR 1 Marotta v R (1999) 73 ALJR 265 R v Baker (2002) 130 A Crim R 417 R v Kelly (Edward) [2000] QB 198 Stalker v The Queen [200…
Robinson v The Queen
[1991] HCA 38

…Kennedy (2000) 118 A Crim R 34 R v MRW (1999) 113 A Crim R 308 R v Southgate [1960] NSWR 477 R v Wilson (1994) 73 A Crim R 532 R v Wood [1974] VR 117 Robinson v The Queen (1991) 65 ALJR 519 Tieleman v The Queen [2004] WASCA 164 Tran v The Queen, unreported; SCt of WA; Library No 990117; 11 March 1999 Wills v Petroulias (2003)…
Chamberlain v The Queen (No 1)
[1983] HCA 13

…Baker v R (2004) 78 ALJR 1483 Caratti v The Queen [1999] WASCA 91 Chamberlain v R (No 1) (1983) 153 CLR 514 Clark v The Queen [2004] WASCA 91 Ex p Maher [1986] 1 QdR 303 Jemielita v R (1994) 12 WAR 362 Lim v Gregson [1989] WAR 1 Marotta v R (1999) 73 ALJR 265 R v Baker (2002) 130 A Crim R 417 R v Kelly (Edward) [2000…
[2000] QB 198
[2000] QB 198

…dR 303 Jemielita v R (1994) 12 WAR 362 Lim v Gregson [1989] WAR 1 Marotta v R (1999) 73 ALJR 265 R v Baker (2002) 130 A Crim R 417 R v Kelly (Edward) [2000] QB 198 Stalker v The Queen [2002] WASCA 364 Tieleman v The Queen [2004] WASCA 164 United Mexican States v Cabal (2001) 209 CLR 165 Draper v The Queen [2000]…

Legislation cited in this decision · 5

Bail Act 1982 (WA)
1 mention
Crimes Act 1914 (Cth)
29D 1 mention
Extradition Act 1988 (Cth)
1 mention
Sentencing Act 1989 (NSW)
1 mention
Supreme Court Act 1935 (WA)
58(1)(b) 1 mention