Cases - High Court of Australia

AV-2019-05-06

Audio-visual recordings of Full Court hearings heard in Canberra

Case: Palmer & Ors v. Australian Electoral Commission & Ors

Date: 06 May 2019

Transcript: Hearing

AV time: 2h 00m

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.

Published in Cases AV

Case B24/2019

De Silva v. The Queen

Case No.

B24/2019

Case Information

Lower Court Judgment

16/10/2018 Supreme Court of Queensland (Court of Appeal)
(Fraser, Gotterson and Morrison JJA)

[2018] QCA 274

Catchwords

Criminal law – Misdirection or non-direction – Where appellant was acquitted of one count of rape and convicted of another count of rape – Where appellant neither gave nor called evidence at trial – Where appellant’s account of events was contained in a recording of his police interview that was tendered by prosecution – Where, in summing up, trial judge addressed evidence of appellant’s interview with police – Whether trial judge’s failure to tell jury that, even if they did not positively believe appellant’s account, they could not find against him if his answers gave rise to reasonable doubt, amounted to a miscarriage of justice – Whether Court of Appeal erred in finding that a Liberato direction is not required if defendant does not give evidence.

Short particulars

Documents

12/04/2019 Hearing (SLA, Brisbane)

26/04/2019 Notice of appeal

31/05/2019 Written submissions (Appellant)

31/05/2019 Chronology (Appellant)

28/06/2019 Written submissions (Respondent)

19/07/2019 Reply (Appellant)

04/09/2019 Hearing (Full Court, Canberra) (Audio-visual recording)

04/09/2019 Outline of oral argument (Appellant)

04/09/2019 Outline of oral argument (Respondent)

13/12/2019 Judgment (Judgment summary)

Published in Cases

Case S123/2019

HT v. The Queen & Anor

Case No.

S123/2019

Case Information

Lower Court Judgment

17/07/2017 Supreme Court of New South Wales (Court of Criminal Appeal) (Hoeben CJ at CL, R A Hulme & Garling JJ)

unreported decision

Catchwords

Criminal law – Procedural fairness – Public interest immunity – Where appellant pleaded guilty to five counts of obtaining money by deception and six counts of dishonestly obtaining a financial advantage by deception – Where Crown appeal resulted in longer sentence of imprisonment – Where appellant, as respondent to Crown appeal, was denied access to evidence admitted in sentencing proceedings which provided basis for reduction in sentence – Whether appellant was denied procedural fairness at hearing of Crown appeal against sentence by being refused access to evidence regarding her assistance to authorities on basis of public interest immunity – Whether Court of Criminal Appeal erred in exercising its discretion in s 5D of Criminal Appeal Act 1912 (NSW) to vary sentence imposed on appellant.

Short particulars

Documents

12/04/2019 Hearing (SLA, Sydney)

24/04/2019 Notice of appeal

31/05/2019 Written submissions (Appellant)

31/05/2019 Chronology (Appellant)

25/06/2019 Hearing (Single Justice, Sydney)

28/06/2019 Written submissions (Second Respondent)

03/07/2019 Written submissions (First Respondent)

26/07/2019 Reply (Appellant)

10/09/2019 Hearing (Full Court, Canberra)

13/11/2019 Judgment (Judgment summary)

Published in Cases

Case S119/2019

State of New South Wales v. Robinson

Case No.

S119/2019

Case Information

Lower Court Judgment

16/10/2018 Supreme Court of New South Wales (Court of Appeal)
(McColl JA, Basten JA, Emmett AJA)

[2018] NSWCA 231

Catchwords

Tort law – False imprisonment and wrongful arrest – Where respondent was suspected of breach of an apprehended violence order by police officer – Where respondent was arrested under s 99 of Law Enforcement (Powers and Responsibilities) Act 2002 (NSW) – Where no decision to charge made at time of arrest – Whether Court of Appeal erred in concluding that, for an arrest to be lawful under s 99, there is an implied requirement that arresting officer intend to charge arrested person with offence.

Short particulars