A case stated under s 302 of the Criminal Procedure Act 2009 (Vic) that asks merely 'was I correct to reach an ultimate conclusion' is unsatisfactory where the dispute involves questions of both fact and law; the question must identify specific questions of law, such as whether particular findings were open to the trial judge. In PII claims under s 130 of the Evidence Act 2008 (Vic), where the gravity of harm to the public interest is grave, a real risk of the eventuation of that harm should be regarded as significant, even though the facts giving rise to the risk must be established on the balance of probabilities. The Jarvie test for fair trial — whether there is good reason to think disclosure may be of substantial assistance to the accused — requires more than a mere speculative possibility.
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 10 later cases that cite this judgment.
2 of the 10 citing cases carry a classified treatment. How each court treated it is available to signed-in members.