Whaddy v The Queen [2001] FCA 1648
Criminal law - Evidence
Whaddy v The Queen [2001] FCA 1648
CRIMINAL LAW - appeal against conviction after jury trial - whether appellant denied right to trial by judge alone.
CRIMINAL LAW - appeal against conviction - appellant found not guilty on some counts - whether verdicts of guilty inconsistent with verdicts of not guilty - whether miscarriage of justice where evidence admissible to prove offences of which found not guilty not admissible to prove offences of which found guilty.
EVIDENCE - appeal against conviction on several counts - admissibility of evidence - whether evidence admissible on certain counts also admissible on other counts - "cross admissibility" - whether trial judge should have ordered separate trials where no "cross admissibility" - Evidence Act 1995 - tendency evidence under s 97 - coincidence rule under s 98 - similar fact evidence - whether evidence was of significant probative value - whether probative value substantially outweighed risk of prejudice - whether common law principles apply - directions to jury.
Seat of Government Act 1908 (Cth), s 4
Criminal Procedure Act 1986 (NSW), ss 30, 31, 32, 33
Criminal Procedure Regulation 1987 (NSW)
Jervis Bay Territory Acceptance Act 1915 (Cth), ss 4, 4A, 4B, 4C, 4D
ACT Self-Government (Consequential Provisions) Act 1988 (Cth), Sch 5
Crimes Act 1900 (ACT), ss 76, 92K, 365(2), 370
Crimes (Amendment) Ordinance (No 5) 1985 (ACT)
Supreme Court Act 1933 (ACT), ss 7, 32, 68, 68A, 68B, 68C
Magistrates Court Act 1930 (ACT), ss 92, 94
Evidence Act 1995 (Cth), ss 97, 98, 101, 137
Queensland v J L Holdings Pty Ltd (1996) 141 ALR 353, cited
MacKenzie v The Queen (1996) 190 CLR 348, discussed
R v Kirkman (1987) 44 SASR 591, referred to
King v The Queen (1986) 161 CLR 423, cited
Pfennig v The Queen (1994-95) 182 CLR 461, discussed
Hoch v The Queen (1988) 165 CLR 292, discussed
R v Locke (unreported, New South Wales Supreme Court, 25 March 1997), discussed
Foley v R (unreported, NSW Court of Criminal Appeal, 5 June 1997), discussed
Garrett (1988) 40 A Crim R 213, discussed
R v Perry (1993) 29 NSWLR 589, discussed
R v Coles (1993) 31 NSWLR 550, discussed
R v Birlut (1995) 39 NSWLR 1, cited
Project Blue Sky Inc v Australian Broadcasting Authority (1998) 194 CLR 355, cited
Johnson (unreported, NSW CCA, 23 July 1990), cited
De Jesus (1986) 68 ALR 1, cited
Jacarav Perpetual Trustees WA Ltd (2000) 106 FCR 51, referred to
Continue reading W v The Queen
Sign in free to access the full text
- AGLC
- Whaddy v The Queen [2001] FCA 1648
- Case
- [2001] FCA 1648
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The primary legal issues addressed by the court were whether the evidence was sufficient to uphold the convictions on the third, sixth, eighth, and ninth counts, and whether evidence obtained under certain conditions should have been excluded. The court examined whether the evidence presented was legally sufficient to prove the charges beyond a reasonable doubt and whether any procedural errors in the handling of the evidence warranted a new trial. The court also considered the impact of any errors on the fairness and integrity of the trial.
In its judgment, the court found that the evidence was not sufficient to support the convictions on the third, sixth, eighth, and ninth counts. The court determined that the errors in the admission of evidence had a material impact on the trial’s outcome, affecting the fairness of the proceedings. As a result, the court concluded that a new trial was necessary to ensure that W was tried fairly and that the verdicts were based on admissible and sufficient evidence. The appeal was allowed, the specified convictions were set aside, and a new trial was ordered for the charges in those counts.
Orders
Orders of the court
1. The appeal be allowed.
2. The verdicts and convictions on the third, sixth, eighth and ninth counts in the indictment be set aside.
3. There be a new trial of the charges in those counts.
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.