Mohareb v Palmer

[2016] NSWCA 378

NSW Court of Appeal

View on CaseLaw

Built by Barristers,
For Australian Law.

See how it works

Interrogate

Catchwords

1. Criminal Law
2. › Perjury
3. › Elements of offence
4. › False statement on oath
5. › Whether omission from affidavit can constitute false statement
6. › Whether literally true statement rendered false by omission of material context
7. › Crimes Act 1900 (NSW), ss 327, 338(1)(c)
1. Criminal Law
2. › Perjury
3. › Leave to prosecute
4. › Application under s 338(1)(c)
5. › Whether reasonable prospect of conviction
6. › Crimes Act 1900 (NSW), s 338(1)(c)
1. Costs
2. › Indemnity costs
3. › Appeal from discretionary costs order
4. › Whether House v The King error demonstrated
5. › Whether indemnity costs appropriate on appeal

Quick Take

A 'false statement on oath' for the purposes of perjury under s 327 of the Crimes Act 1900 (NSW) necessarily describes something said or written; it does not extend to a representation conveyed by conduct including omissions from an affidavit. A literally true statement is not rendered false for perjury purposes merely because it omits material context that would change the impression conveyed. The precise threshold test for granting leave to prosecute for perjury under s 338(1)(c) was left open.