Audio-visual recordings of Full Court hearings heard in Canberra
Case: CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER, ABORIGINAL AREAS PROTECTION AUTHORITY V DIRECTOR OF NATIONAL PARKS & ANOR
Date: 13 December 2023
Transcript: Hearing
AV time: 2h 47m
You accept the terms of use (below) by playing this audio-visual recording.
Terms of use
Access to the audio-visual recordings of the Court is subject to the following conditions:
(1) You will not record, copy, modify, reproduce, publish, republish, upload, post, transmit, broadcast, rebroadcast, store, distribute or otherwise make available, in any manner, any proceeding or part of any proceeding, other than with prior written approval of the Court. However, schools and universities may broadcast/rebroadcast proceedings in a classroom setting for educational purposes without prior written approval.
(2) The audio-visual material available via our web-site of Court proceedings does not constitute the official record of the Court.
(3) Copyright of the footage of the proceedings is retained by the Court.
By clicking "play" (the triangle controls on the video player), you agree to be bound by these terms of use.
Audio-visual recordings of Full Court hearings heard in Canberra
Case: CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER, ABORIGINAL AREAS PROTECTION AUTHORITY V DIRECTOR OF NATIONAL PARKS & ANOR
Date: 12 December 2023
Transcript: Hearing
AV time: 4h 34m
You accept the terms of use (below) by playing this audio-visual recording.
Terms of use
Access to the audio-visual recordings of the Court is subject to the following conditions:
(1) You will not record, copy, modify, reproduce, publish, republish, upload, post, transmit, broadcast, rebroadcast, store, distribute or otherwise make available, in any manner, any proceeding or part of any proceeding, other than with prior written approval of the Court. However, schools and universities may broadcast/rebroadcast proceedings in a classroom setting for educational purposes without prior written approval.
(2) The audio-visual material available via our web-site of Court proceedings does not constitute the official record of the Court.
(3) Copyright of the footage of the proceedings is retained by the Court.
By clicking "play" (the triangle controls on the video player), you agree to be bound by these terms of use.
Audio-visual recordings of Full Court hearings heard in Canberra
Case: AB (A PSEUDONYM) & ANOR V INDEPENDENT BROAD-BASED
Date: 07 December 2023
Transcript: Hearing
AV time: 3h 15m
You accept the terms of use (below) by playing this audio-visual recording.
Terms of use
Access to the audio-visual recordings of the Court is subject to the following conditions:
(1) You will not record, copy, modify, reproduce, publish, republish, upload, post, transmit, broadcast, rebroadcast, store, distribute or otherwise make available, in any manner, any proceeding or part of any proceeding, other than with prior written approval of the Court. However, schools and universities may broadcast/rebroadcast proceedings in a classroom setting for educational purposes without prior written approval.
(2) The audio-visual material available via our web-site of Court proceedings does not constitute the official record of the Court.
(3) Copyright of the footage of the proceedings is retained by the Court.
By clicking "play" (the triangle controls on the video player), you agree to be bound by these terms of use.
Dayney v. The King
Case No.
B69/2023
Case Information
Lower Court Judgment
6/04/2023 Supreme Court of Queensland (Court of Appeal) (Mullins P; Dalton JA; Boddice J)
Catchwords
Criminal law – Appeal against conviction – Self-defence against provoked assault – Criminal Code (Qld), s 272 – Where appellant involved in violent altercation resulting in death of another individual – Where appellant convicted of murder – Where appellant successfully appealed conviction – Where s 272 of Criminal Code (Qld) affords defence of self-defence against provoked assault – Where majority in first appeal held final clause of s 272(2) ousts protection afforded by s 271(1) only where force used in self-defence results in death or grievous bodily harm – Where minority held final clause of s 272(2) applies to modify effect of first two clauses in s 272(2) – Where jury in retrial directed in accordance with majority’s interpretation of s 272 and appellant convicted of murder – Where appellant appeals second time on ground minority’s interpretation of s 272(2) in first appeal is correct and decision of majority plainly wrong – Whether Court of Appeal erred in holding final clause of s 272(2) constitutes standalone exception to protection afforded by self-defence against provoked assault – Proper meaning of “before such necessity arose”.
Documents*
21/11/2023 Hearing (SLA, Canberra)
05/12/2023 Notice of appeal
23/01/2024 Written submissions (Appellant)
23/01/2024 Chronology (Appellant)
20/02/2024 Written submissions (Respondent)
12/03/2024 Reply
19/04/2024 Hearing (Full Court, Canberra)
19/04/2024 Outline of oral argument (Appellant)
19/04/2024 Outline of oral argument (Respondent)
The Director of Public Prosecutions v. Benjamin Roder (a pseudonym)
Case No.
Case no M85/2023
Case Information
Lower Court Judgment
31/10/2023 Supreme Court of Victoria (Court of Appeal) (Priest, Niall & Taylor JJA)
Catchwords
Evidence – Tendency evidence – Standard of proof – Where respondent is to be tried in County Court of Victoria on indictment charging him with 27 sexual offences against two sons of his former domestic partner – Where prosecution gave notice of intention to adduce tendency evidence that respondent had tendency to have improper sexual interest in stepchildren and tendency to act in particular ways towards them – Where trial judge ruled jury should be directed that "the charged acts must be proved beyond reasonable doubt" before they could be used as tendency evidence – Where Court of Appeal refused leave to appeal from trial judge's decision – Whether Court of Appeal erred in upholding interlocutory decision of County Court of Victoria on basis that where charged act relied upon as evidence to prove tendency, jury should be directed that charged act must be proved beyond reasonable doubt before it can be so used – Whether such direction prohibited by s 61 of Jury Directions Act 2015 (Vic).
Documents*
28/11/2023 Application for special leave to appeal
07/12/2023 Hearing (Gordon J, Canberra by remote connection)
22/01/2024 Written submissions (Applicant)
22/01/2024 Chronology (Applicant)
14/02/2024 Written submissions (Respondent)
26/02/2024 Reply
13/03/2024 Hearing (Full Court, Canberra) (Audio-visual recording)
13/03/2024 Outline of oral argument (Applicant)
13/03/2024 Outline of oral argument (Respondent)
17/04/2024 Judgment (Judgment summary)