R v Nash [2019] NSWDC 64

R v Nash [2019] NSWDC 64

The attempt by the Crown to lead evidence that Mr Nash gave false evidence as to the number of beers consumed does not directly impugn or controvert the magistrate’s acquittal, which was not solely based upon that fact. Therefore, there is no abuse of process and the stay should be declined.

Parties
Prosecution: Regina (Crown); Accused: Bernard Andrew Nash
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
31 January 2019
Procedural Posture
Criminal / Interlocutory Application for Stay of Indictment
Outcome
Stay of proceedings declined
Legal Topics
Stay of Proceedings, Perjury, Abuse of Process, Double Jeopardy, Incontrovertibility of Acquittal, Driving Under the Influence
Criminal Law Stay of Proceedings Perjury Abuse of Process Double Jeopardy Incontrovertibility of Acquittal Driving Under the Influence

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 4 Authorities cited 20 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Regina (Crown)

Prosecution

Bernard Andrew Nash

Accused

Procedural Posture

Criminal / Interlocutory Application for Stay of Indictment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether proceedings on an indictment for perjury should be stayed on the basis of the principle of the incontrovertibility of a verdict of acquittal and abuse of process

Ratio Decidendi

The attempt by the Crown to lead evidence that Mr Nash gave false evidence as to the number of beers consumed does not directly impugn or controvert the magistrate’s acquittal, which was not solely based upon that fact. Therefore, there is no abuse of process and the stay should be declined.

Court Disposition

Stay of proceedings declined

Orders

  • Application for a stay of the indictment is refused