R (Cth) v Milne (No. 1) [2010] NSWSC 932

R (Cth) v Milne (No. 1) [2010] NSWSC 932

The prosecution of the indictment with both counts does not constitute an abuse of process. There is sufficient distinction and alleged remnant criminality to justify joinder; allegations concerning the Stichting Group and subsequent conduct with accountants evidence distinct phases of criminality. The expert report of Shaun Mark is not admitted in its present form due to confusion arising from the use of statutory terms not relevant to the trial; however, appropriately confined expert evidence may be led. Foreign documentary evidence obtained under the Mutual Assistance and Foreign Evidence Acts is admissible and objections grounded in hearsay or discretionary exclusion are rejected; no...

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
19 August 2010
Procedural Posture
Criminal / Pretrial Ruling
Outcome
Applications declined; evidence largely admitted.
Legal Topics
['money Laundering' 'dishonest Obtaining' 'abuse of Process' 'documentary Evidence' 'pretrial Applications' 'foreign Evidence']
['criminal Law'] ['money Laundering' 'dishonest Obtaining' 'abuse of Process' 'documentary Evidence' 'pretrial Applications' 'foreign Evidence']

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 / Pretrial Ruling

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether prosecution of both money laundering and dishonest obtaining charges on one indictment constitutes an abuse of process' 'Admissibility of expert evidence (Shaun Mark Report)' 'Admissibility of foreign documentary evidence under Foreign Evidence Act 1994 (Cth)' 'Relevance and discretionary exclusion of certain evidence']

Ratio Decidendi

The prosecution of the indictment with both counts does not constitute an abuse of process. There is sufficient distinction and alleged remnant criminality to justify joinder; allegations concerning the Stichting Group and subsequent conduct with accountants evidence distinct phases of criminality. The expert report of Shaun Mark is not admitted in its present form due to confusion arising from the use of statutory terms not relevant to the trial; however, appropriately confined expert evidence may be led. Foreign documentary evidence obtained under the Mutual Assistance and Foreign Evidence Acts is admissible and objections grounded in hearsay or discretionary exclusion are rejected; no...

Court Disposition

Applications declined; evidence largely admitted.

Orders

  • ['Application for permanent stay of prosecution on indictment refused.' 'Application to admit expert report of Shaun Evan Mark declined; Crown may seek to tender further evidence.' 'Application to exclude affidavits of Wim Langeveld, Claudio Pfammetter, Vladimir Stemberger declined.' 'Application to exclude Crown...