R v WE (No.15) [2020] NSWSC 332

R v WE (No.15) [2020] NSWSC 332

Because the accused refused to answer a question in cross-examination after being directed to do so and warned that refusal could amount to contempt, and because dealing with the contempt immediately would further delay the trial and was not urgent, the appropriate course was to direct the Registrar under Part 55 Rule 11(1) of the Supreme Court Rules 1970 (NSW) to commence or apply for contempt proceedings. Although the accused was self-represented, the Court had a discretion to permit the Crown Prosecutor to make a final address; given the volume of evidence and the assistance an address would give the jury, that discretion should be exercised in favour of allowing the Crown address,...

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
23 March 2020
Procedural Posture
Criminal Trial Ruling Concerning Contempt and Closing Address / Procedural Ruling During Trial After the Self Represented Accused Refused to Answer Questions in Cross Examination
Outcome
Registrar directed to commence or apply for contempt proceedings; Crown Prosecutor permitted to make a final address to the jury.
Legal Topics
['self Represented Accused' 'refusal to Answer Questions in Cross Examination' 'direction to Registrar to Commence Contempt Proceedings' "crown Prosecutor's Final Address to Jury"]
['criminal Law' 'practice and Procedure' 'contempt of Court'] ['self Represented Accused' 'refusal to Answer Questions in Cross Examination' 'direction to Registrar to Commence Contempt Proceedings' "crown Prosecutor's Final Address to Jury"]

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 Trial Ruling Concerning Contempt and Closing Address / Procedural Ruling During Trial After the Self Represented Accused Refused to Answer Questions in Cross Examination

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the Crown was bound to put its case to the accused despite his anticipated refusal to answer further questions.' "What course should be taken regarding the accused's prima facie contempt arising from his refusal to answer a question after a judicial direction." 'Whether the Crown Prosecutor should be permitted to make a final address to the jury where the accused was self-represented.']

Ratio Decidendi

Because the accused refused to answer a question in cross-examination after being directed to do so and warned that refusal could amount to contempt, and because dealing with the contempt immediately would further delay the trial and was not urgent, the appropriate course was to direct the Registrar under Part 55 Rule 11(1) of the Supreme Court Rules 1970 (NSW) to commence or apply for contempt proceedings. Although the accused was self-represented, the Court had a discretion to permit the Crown Prosecutor to make a final address; given the volume of evidence and the assistance an address would give the jury, that discretion should be exercised in favour of allowing the Crown address,...

Court Disposition

Registrar directed to commence or apply for contempt proceedings; Crown Prosecutor permitted to make a final address to the jury.

Orders

  • ['Pursuant to Part 55 Rule 11(1) of the Supreme Court Rules 1970 (NSW), the Registrar is directed to apply by motion for, or to commence proceedings for, the contempt of Court prima facie committed by the accused on 23 March 2020.' 'For the purposes of order 1, a copy of the judgment and a copy of the transcript of...