Sultan (a pseudonym) v The King

[2025] VSCA 171

Victorian Court of Appeal

Built by Barristers,
For Australian Law.

See how it works

Interrogate

Catchwords

1. Criminal Law
2. › Interlocutory appeal
3. › Review of refusal to certify
4. › Evidentiary ruling
5. › Admissions to covert police operative in cells
6. › Whether evidence if ruled inadmissible would eliminate or substantially weaken prosecution case
7. › Criminal Procedure Act 2009 (Vic), s 295(3)(a)
1. Evidence
2. › Admissibility
3. › Admissions
4. › Admissions to covert police operative
5. › Whether improperly obtained
6. › Evidence Act 2008 (Vic), ss 90, 138

Quick Take

Where a prosecution case retains a strong circumstantial foundation independent of admissions evidence — including CCTV, DNA, telecommunications, and associate communications — the exclusion of admissions to a covert police operative will not meet the 'substantially weaken' threshold for certification under s 295(3)(a) of the Criminal Procedure Act 2009.

Case Details

Citation[2025] VSCA 171

CourtVSCA

JurisdictionVictoria

Unlock so much more with Barrister AI

The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 1 later case that cites this judgment.

1 of the 1 citing case carries a classified treatment. How each court treated it is available to signed-in members.

Relies on8

2022Marston v The KingVSCA 253
2020Cano (a pseudonym) v The QueenVSCA 308
2019Peterson (a Pseudonym) v The QueenVSCA 12
2017Harris (a Pseudonym) v The QueenVSCA 316
and 4 more after sign-in

Create free account

Already have an account? Sign in