Attorney General for New South Wales v Dylan CHIDGEY

(2008) 182 A Crim R 536; [2008] NSWCCA 65

NSW Court of Criminal Appeal

View on CaseLaw

Built by Barristers,
For Australian Law.

See how it works

Interrogate

Catchwords

1. Criminal Law
2. › Criminal Appeal Act 1912 (NSW)
3. › Appeal against interlocutory judgment or order
4. › Section 5F
5. › Standing of Attorney General
6. › Whether Attorney General has unqualified right of appeal under s 5F(2)
7. › Whether interest in proceedings required
1. Practice and Procedure
2. › Subpoena for production
3. › Legitimate forensic purpose
4. › Two-step test
5. › Whether 'on the cards' that documents will materially assist case
6. › Whether mere relevance sufficient
7. › Fishing expedition
8. › Criminal proceedings
1. Evidence
2. › Exclusion of improperly or illegally obtained evidence
3. › Section 138 Evidence Act 1995 (NSW)
4. › Controlled operations
5. › Whether non-compliance with procedural requirements grounds application under s 138
1. Statutory Interpretation
2. › Construction of statutory right of appeal
3. › Plain and unambiguous language
4. › Whether words should be implied to limit statutory right
5. › Criminal Appeal Act 1912 (NSW), s 5F(2)

Quick Take

The test for production of documents under subpoena in NSW criminal proceedings remains the two-step test from R v Saleam [1999]: the applicant must identify a legitimate forensic purpose and establish it is 'on the cards' that the documents will materially assist the case. Mere relevance is insufficient, and the approach in Roads & Traffic Authority of NSW v Conolly should not be followed. The Attorney General has an unqualified right of appeal under s 5F(2) of the Criminal Appeal Act 1912 without needing to establish any interest in the proceedings.