Search for a case
Browse for a case
… by year
… by category
Seo v R [2025] NSWCCA 131
In this decision, the Court of Criminal Appeal has held that the process of providing a jury the transcript in a trial must be attended with a degree of formality, including involving the Court itself in the process.
Dimitriou v R [2025] NSWCCA 18
The Court of Criminal Appeal (‘CCA’) has held that in a prosecution for the offence of Fraud, it is not necessary for the Crown to prove that the accused intended the financial advantage or financial disadvantage or was reckless as to that outcome. The element of deception in this context already re
Bazzi v R [2024] NSWCCA 35
In this judgment dealing with the problematic (but relatively common) offence under s 115 of the Crimes Act, the Court of Criminal Appeal has discussed the elements of the offence, revisited the problems with sentencing for it, and called for Parliamentary intervention.
Marium v Van Zuylen [2024] NSWSC 258
In this decision a single judge of the Supreme Court has confirmed that a Court Attendance Notice (‘CAN’) can be replaced or amended at any time before a hearing by the issue of a new CAN, without leave being required. This is despite the words of the Criminal Procedure Act (‘the Act’) indicating, o
R v DK [2023] NSWCCA 281
In this decision, the CCA has looked at practitioners’ obligations when they receive a subpoena in relation to a former client, and confirmed that the District Court has no power to order costs to the recipient of a subpoena from the Crown.
Rodden v R [2023] NSWCCA 202
In this decision the CCA has determined that a person on a grant of Legal Aid can be granted a certificate under the Costs in Criminal Cases Act 1967 (‘the Act’).
Edwards v The Queen [2021] HCA 28
In this decision of the High Court, both judgments make comments favouring the provision of all electronic data to defendants (as distinct from merely telling them that the material exists). But it also serves as a reminder that if there is late disclosure and the defendant does not seek to make use
Trevascus v R [2021] NSWCCA 104
In this decision, the CCA held that oral jury directions are always necessary, even if written directions are provided. If a written document is given to the jury, it needs to be read out and explained, and ordinarily the jury should not be asked to read the document on their own outside of court.
VP v R [2021] NSWCCA 11
In this decision the Court of Criminal Appeal (‘CCA’) has held that if a defendant remains silent until the end of a trial about the prosecutor’s failure to call witnesses, they risk the appearance that it was a forensic decision – and that may impact on whether the failure will amount to a miscarri
Curran v R [2020] NSWCCA 171
In this decision the Court of Criminal Appeal (‘CCA’) has harshly criticised comments made by a prosecutor which suggested the accused had a motive to lie in order to be acquitted, and a comment that he might have a broader tendency than that actually pleaded in the tendency notice.
Kahil v R [2020] NSWCCA 56
Some practitioners likely have health concerns which place them at particular risk if they contract COVID-19. Those practitioners may also feel compromised by the lengthy history of some matters, so that they don’t feel they can withdraw, especially if there is no other representation available (for
Bradley v Senior Constable Chilby [2020] NSWSC 145
The Supreme Court has reiterated that the duties of disclosure are broad, and a failure to comply with them can (and here, did) result in a temporary stay of proceedings, where police refused to produce a criminal history, Facts Sheets, and records of conversations between police officers and the po
HT v The Queen [2019] HCA 40
In a High Court decision which was handed down close to publication deadline (leaving the door open for this perpetually-late author to do the summary), the High Court has determined that it is not permissible to use ‘closed material’ procedures on sentence, in which an affidavit is provided to the
Marwan v Director of Public Prosecutions [2019] NSWCCA 161
In this decision the CCA has assumed, without deciding, that at least sometimes there is an obligation on the Crown to make further inquiries. But that obligation, if it exists, is reserved for an ‘appropriate case’ (whatever that might mean), and calling upon it poses a number of hurdles for an acc
AB (A Pseudonym) v R (No 3) [2019] NSWCCA 46
The Court of Criminal Appeal (‘CCA’) has held that, in considering whether to make a non-publication order under the Court Suppression and Non-Publication Orders Act 2010 on the basis that a person might suffer harm, the correct approach is one of the ‘calculus of risk’. Additionally, it found that
Director of Public Prosecutions (NSW) v Kirby [2017] NSWSC 1754
In the course of confirming that the offence of driving under the influence of drugs or alcohol does not require that the prosecution prove that the drugs or alcohol affected the accused’s manner of driving, the Supreme Court has also considered the procedure in relation to ‘no case to answer’ submi
Director of Public Prosecutions (NSW) v Charheh [2017] NSWSC 1061
The Supreme Court has emphasised that, generally, an inaccurate allegation about the date or time on which an offence occurred will not affect the outcome in a prosecution.