R v Cb; Mp v R

(2011) 291 FLR 113; [2011] NSWCCA 264

NSW Court of Criminal Appeal

View on CaseLaw

Built by Barristers,
For Australian Law.

See how it works

Interrogate

Catchwords

1. Criminal Law
2. › Practice and Procedure
3. › Permanent stay of proceedings
4. › Abuse of process
5. › Whether compulsory examination of accused by Australian Crime Commission after being charged constituted interference with administration of justice justifying permanent stay
6. › Whether fair trial could be ensured by protective measures short of stay
7. › Australian Crime Commission Act 2002 (Cth), ss 25A, 29A, 30
1. Criminal Law
2. › Practice and Procedure
3. › Permanent stay of proceedings
4. › Principles governing grant of permanent stay
5. › Whether fundamental defect going to root of trial
6. › Whether other remedial measures available
7. › Whether prejudice must be demonstrated rather than assumed
1. Criminal Law
2. › Australian Crime Commission
3. › Examination of persons charged with offences
4. › Statutory protective regime
5. › Interaction of confidentiality provisions with disclosure obligations
6. › Whether ACC Act permits examination on subject matter of pending charges where protective directions in place
7. › Australian Crime Commission Act 2002 (Cth), ss 12(1), 25A(9), 29A, 59(7)
1. Statutory Interpretation
2. › Harmonious construction
3. › Interaction of competing statutory provisions
4. › Identification of leading and subordinate provisions
5. › Whether confidentiality directions override disclosure obligations
6. › Project Blue Sky v Australian Broadcasting Authority [1998] HCA 28

Quick Take

The ACC Act's protective regime (use immunity under s 30(5), confidentiality directions under ss 25A(9) and 29A) is sufficient to safeguard the right to a fair trial when an accused is examined after being charged, and the mere fact of such an examination cannot justify a permanent stay absent evidence that information was or was at real risk of being communicated to the prosecution. A District Court judge exercising federal jurisdiction is bound to follow Full Federal Court decisions on the same issue and cannot decline to do so on the basis that the decision is 'plainly wrong'.