Wright v The State Coroner

In Wright v The State Coroner, the applicant contested the requirement to provide evidence before a section 10 Coroner's Act 1958 (Qld) inquiry, arguing that the privilege against self-incrimination was not abrogated by the Act. The central issue before the court was whether section 34 of the Coroner’s Act 1958 (Qld) expressly abrogated the right to claim privilege against self-incrimination for questions related to section 10 inquiries. The applicant contended that section 34 did not expressly oust the privilege, and therefore, witnesses should retain the common law right to refuse to answer questions that might incriminate them.

The court examined the language of section 34, particularly subsection (4), which mandates that relevant witnesses shall be compellable to answer questions about specific topics pertinent to section 10 inquiries. The court held that by explicitly stating that a relevant witness "shall be compellable" to answer questions about section 10 topics, the section overrides the common law privilege against self-incrimination. The court reasoned that section 34(4) confers more than the ordinary power of a presiding judicial officer to require witnesses to answer relevant questions. Instead, it expressly compels witnesses to answer questions on specific topics, thereby overriding the witness's right not to be compelled to answer questions that might incriminate them. The court concluded that section 34(4) does indeed expressly abrogate the privilege against self-incrimination for the purposes of section 10 inquiries.

The court dismissed the application, affirming that section 34 of the Coroner’s Act 1958 (Qld) does expressly oust the right to claim privilege against self-incrimination in respect of questions about section 10 inquiries. Consequently, the applicant was required to comply with the Coroner’s directive to give evidence as a relevant witness at the section 10 inquiry.