R v DLW [2020] NSWDC 205

R v DLW [2020] NSWDC 205

The Court was satisfied that it was in the interests of justice for the accused to be tried by a Judge alone. Section 365 reflected the legislative intention that court business continue during the COVID-19 pandemic and that more judge alone trials be facilitated. If the trial did not proceed by judge alone on 25 May 2020, it was uncertain when it would proceed, and the certainty of delay was the most decisive consideration, particularly given the accused's lengthy time in custody. The absence of any issue requiring community standards reduced the need for a jury, the credibility issue was neutral, and the accused had elected judge alone trial with legal advice.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
15 May 2020
Procedural Posture
Criminal Application for Trial by Judge Alone / Pre Trial Procedural Ruling
Outcome
Application allowed
Legal Topics
['judge Alone Trial' 'covid 19 Pandemic' 'interests of Justice' 'delay in Criminal Trials' 'sexual Offences Against Children']
['criminal Procedure'] ['judge Alone Trial' 'covid 19 Pandemic' 'interests of Justice' 'delay in Criminal Trials' 'sexual Offences Against Children']

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 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Procedural Posture

Criminal Application for Trial by Judge Alone / Pre Trial Procedural Ruling

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether the accused's trial on indictment should proceed by judge alone where the accused consents but the prosecutor does not consent." 'Whether, in light of the COVID-19 pandemic and s 365 of the Criminal Procedure Act 1985 (NSW), it was in the interests of justice for the accused to be tried by a Judge alone.' "What weight should be given to the accused's time in custody, uncertainty and delay in jury trials, absence of community standards issues, and witness credibility considerations."]

Ratio Decidendi

The Court was satisfied that it was in the interests of justice for the accused to be tried by a Judge alone. Section 365 reflected the legislative intention that court business continue during the COVID-19 pandemic and that more judge alone trials be facilitated. If the trial did not proceed by judge alone on 25 May 2020, it was uncertain when it would proceed, and the certainty of delay was the most decisive consideration, particularly given the accused's lengthy time in custody. The absence of any issue requiring community standards reduced the need for a jury, the credibility issue was neutral, and the accused had elected judge alone trial with legal advice.

Court Disposition

Application allowed

Orders

  • ["The accused's application for a Judge alone trial is allowed."]