Director of Public Prosecutions (Cth) v Ingram

• 1. Criminal Law
  2. › Complicity
  3. › Commission by proxy
  4. › Whether s 11.3 of Commonwealth Criminal Code confined to proxies who lack requisite mental state
  5. › Whether pre-existing common law doctrine of 'innocent agency' should be imported into the Code
  6. › Whether obiter dicta in CDPP v Brady should be followed
  7. › Criminal Code (Cth), s 11.3
• 1. Criminal Law
  2. › Complicity
  3. › Commission by proxy
  4. › Whether Crown may advance alternative case under s 11.3 where accused also charged as principal
  5. › Whether s 11.3 available where proxy also charged as principal on joint indictment
  6. › Criminal Code (Cth), ss 11.2, 11.3
• 1. Criminal Law
  2. › Indictment
  3. › Particulars
  4. › Whether Crown required to amend indictment to particularise reliance on deeming provisions such as ss 11.2 and 11.3
  5. › Whether accused fairly apprised of nature of Crown case
  6. › Criminal Procedure Act 1986 (NSW), ss 20, 29
• 1. Criminal Law
  2. › Statutory interpretation
  3. › Commonwealth Criminal Code
  4. › Approach to interpretation of Code provisions
  5. › Whether Code provisions to be construed by reference to pre-existing common law
  6. › Use of headings and marginal notes in statutory construction
  7. › Criminal Code (Cth), ss 11.2, 11.3

Quick Take