Doyle v Commissioner of Police [2020] NSWCA 11

Doyle v Commissioner of Police [2020] NSWCA 11

The warrant was invalid because the issuing officer did not comply with s 65 of LEPRA; there was failure to bring real attention to bear upon the application, where forms were pre-populated with grounds by the police officer and not properly completed by the issuing officer, and the process occurred in an inadequately short timeframe.

Parties
First Applicant: Philip William Doyle; Second Applicant: Mark Barbeliuk; First Respondent: Commissioner of Police; Second Respondent: Detective Senior Constable Tiffany O'Neill; Third Respondent: Deputy Registrar Cally D'Arcy
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
14 February 2020
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Court of Appeal Decision After Leave Granted
Outcome
Appeal allowed; search warrant declared invalid; discretionary relief and costs reserved for further hearing
Legal Topics
Invalidity of Search Warrant, Compliance With Law Enforcement (powers and Responsibilities) Act 2002 (nsw), Judicial Discretion for Return of Seized Items
Criminal Law Administrative Law Civil Procedure Invalidity of Search Warrant Compliance With Law Enforcement (powers and Responsibilities) Act 2002 (nsw) Judicial Discretion for Return of Seized Items

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 2 Authorities cited 21 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Philip William Doyle

First Applicant

Mark Barbeliuk

Second Applicant

Commissioner of Police

First Respondent

Detective Senior Constable Tiffany O'Neill

Second Respondent

Deputy Registrar Cally D'Arcy

Third Respondent

Procedural Posture

Appeal / Court of Appeal Decision After Leave Granted

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the issuing officer complied with ss 48 and 65 of Law Enforcement (Powers and Responsibilities) Act 2002 (NSW)
  2. 2 Whether the search warrant was valid or invalid as a result
  3. 3 Whether relief should issue for return of seized items

Ratio Decidendi

The warrant was invalid because the issuing officer did not comply with s 65 of LEPRA; there was failure to bring real attention to bear upon the application, where forms were pre-populated with grounds by the police officer and not properly completed by the issuing officer, and the process occurred in an inadequately short timeframe.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; search warrant declared invalid; discretionary relief and costs reserved for further hearing

Orders

  • Grant leave to appeal, including under Felons (Civil Proceedings) Act 1981 (NSW) if necessary.
  • Appellants to file notice of appeal within 7 days and dispense with service requirements.