R v Obeid [2022] NSWDC 51

R v Obeid [2022] NSWDC 51

The applications failed because ICAC had, at commencement and throughout the compulsory examinations and public inquiry, sufficient material to form the opinion required by s 13 of the ICAC Act that conduct amounting to corrupt conduct may have occurred. The investigation was directed to whether Moses Obeid provided a substantial benefit connected with the Honda CR-V to a Minister of the Crown in circumstances capable of affecting the probity of the Minister's official functions, including possible past or future favours to Obeid business interests. The alleged conduct was capable of constituting an offence under s 249B(2) of the Crimes Act 1900 (NSW); Mr Roozendaal's lack of knowledge of...

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
04 February 2022
Procedural Posture
Criminal Proceedings on Indictment for Giving False Evidence to the Independent Commission Against Corruption Contrary to S 87 of the Independent Commission Against Corruption Act 1988 (nsw) / Pre Trial Applications for Permanent Stay of Proceedings and Exclusion of Evidence Under Ss 138 and 90 of the Evidence Act 1995 (nsw)
Outcome
Applications dismissed.
Legal Topics
['permanent Stay of Criminal Proceedings' 'improperly Obtained Evidence' 'unfair Use of Admissions' 'icac Investigative Jurisdiction' 'corrupt Conduct' 'corrupt Commissions or Rewards' 'false or Misleading Evidence at Public Inquiry or Compulsory Examination']
['criminal Procedure' 'evidence' 'anti Corruption and Public Administration'] ['permanent Stay of Criminal Proceedings' 'improperly Obtained Evidence' 'unfair Use of Admissions' 'icac Investigative Jurisdiction' 'corrupt Conduct' 'corrupt Commissions or Rewards' 'false or Misleading Evidence at Public Inquiry or Compulsory Examination']

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 Proceedings on Indictment for Giving False Evidence to the Independent Commission Against Corruption Contrary to S 87 of the Independent Commission Against Corruption Act 1988 (nsw) / Pre Trial Applications for Permanent Stay of Proceedings and Exclusion of Evidence Under Ss 138 and 90 of the Evidence Act 1995 (nsw)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the ICAC investigation into the procurement of a Honda CR-V motor vehicle for Mr Eric Roozendaal was ultra vires because the conduct investigated was not capable of being corrupt conduct within ss 8 and 9 of the Independent Commission Against Corruption Act 1988 (NSW).' 'Whether the alleged conduct was capable of constituting a criminal offence under s 249B(2) of the Crimes Act 1900 (NSW), including whether Mr Roozendaal had to know of the benefit or corrupt purpose.' 'Whether the proceedings should be permanently stayed as an abuse of process because the prosecution relies on evidence compelled by ICAC.' "Whether the accused's representations should be excluded under s 138 of the Evidence Act 1995 (NSW) as improperly or illegally obtained." "Whether the accused's representations should be excluded under s 90 of the Evidence Act 1995 (NSW) on the basis that their use would be unfair."]

Ratio Decidendi

The applications failed because ICAC had, at commencement and throughout the compulsory examinations and public inquiry, sufficient material to form the opinion required by s 13 of the ICAC Act that conduct amounting to corrupt conduct may have occurred. The investigation was directed to whether Moses Obeid provided a substantial benefit connected with the Honda CR-V to a Minister of the Crown in circumstances capable of affecting the probity of the Minister's official functions, including possible past or future favours to Obeid business interests. The alleged conduct was capable of constituting an offence under s 249B(2) of the Crimes Act 1900 (NSW); Mr Roozendaal's lack of knowledge of...

Court Disposition

Applications dismissed.

Orders

  • ['The application that the proceedings, or alternatively the proceedings other than Counts 1 and 5, be permanently stayed is dismissed.' 'The application that the representations relied upon by the Crown, or alternatively the proceedings other than Counts 1 and 5, be excluded under s 138 of the Evidence Act 1995...