R v Keli LANE [No 20] [2010] NSWSC 1547

R v Keli LANE [No 20] [2010] NSWSC 1547

The matter was covered by paragraphs 77 and 78 of the earlier decision, and the Court of Criminal Appeal had not reversed that aspect. Although the Crown's proposed argument was somewhat different, it essentially had the same problems identified in those paragraphs, so the Court would not in its discretion allow the Crown to advance it.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
22 November 2010
Procedural Posture
Criminal Proceeding / Procedural Ruling
Outcome
Crown not allowed to advance the argument.
Legal Topics
['crown Submissions' 'exercise of Discretion' 'prior Ruling and Court of Criminal Appeal']
['criminal Law' 'criminal Procedure'] ['crown Submissions' 'exercise of Discretion' 'prior Ruling and Court of Criminal Appeal']

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 1 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 1 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Procedural Posture

Criminal Proceeding / Procedural Ruling

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the Crown should be allowed, in the exercise of discretion, to advance an argument said to be somewhat different from the matter originally argued.']

Ratio Decidendi

The matter was covered by paragraphs 77 and 78 of the earlier decision, and the Court of Criminal Appeal had not reversed that aspect. Although the Crown's proposed argument was somewhat different, it essentially had the same problems identified in those paragraphs, so the Court would not in its discretion allow the Crown to advance it.

Court Disposition

Crown not allowed to advance the argument.

Orders

  • ['The Court would not, in the exercise of discretion, allow the Crown to advance the argument.']