DLS Portal Maintenance Outage September 2025

The DLS Portal will be offline for maintenance and upgrades from 6.00pm (AEST) Friday, 12 September 2025 to 8.00am (AEST) Monday, 15 September 2025.

Nicholls v The Queen
Coates v The Queen

[2005] HCA 1
Judgment date
Case number
P79/2003
P81/2003
Before
Gleeson CJ, McHugh, Gummow, Kirby, Hayne, Callinan, Heydon JJ
Catchwords

Criminal law – Evidence – Admissibility of admissions made off-video during interview with accused – Whether reasonable excuse for not videotaping admissions – Criminal Code (WA), s 570D(2)(b), (4).

Criminal law – Evidence ¬– Admissibility of evidence of prior inconsistent statement of witness – Whether evidence of statement went to issue – Whether admissible as exception to rule against admission of collateral statements – Whether exceptions of bias, interest or corruption applicable – Whether the detail of alleged statement indicating an exception to the collateral evidence rule must be put specifically to the witness in cross-examination.

Evidence – Criminal trial – Prior inconsistent statement of witness – Whether admissible as exception to rule against collateral statements – Admissions allegedly made off-video during interview by police – Whether reasonable excuse for not videotaping such admissions.

Criminal law – Evidence – Whether evidence of prior inconsistent statement hearsay – Whether exception to hearsay rule.

Criminal law – Jury directions – Whether trial judge's direction accorded with McKinney v The Queen – Appropriateness of reference to possible perjury on part of police.

Criminal law – Evidence – Admissions – Adequacy of trial judge's direction – Whether need for McKinney direction.

Words and phrases – "interview", "reasonable excuse".

Criminal Code (WA) – s 570D.

Evidence Act 1906 (WA) – s 21.

Files
1.rtf (199.62 KB)
1.pdf (477.92 KB)