Hore v The QueenWichen v The QueenCitation:[2022] HCA 22Before:Keane, Gordon, Edelman, Steward, Gleeson JJDate:15 Jun 2022Case Number:A5/2022, A6/2022Read more

Hore v The QueenWichen v The QueenCitation:[2022] HCA 22Before:Keane, Gordon, Edelman, Steward, Gleeson JJDate:15 Jun 2022Case Number:A5/2022, A6/2022Read more

'Willing' in section 59(1a)(a) does not simply mean the converse of 'unwilling' in section 57(1); the Supreme Court must assess willingness to control sexual instincts without regard to the likely effect of licence conditions.

Parties
Applicant: Applicant; Respondent: Respondent
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
15 June 2022
Procedural Posture
Criminal / Judgment
Outcome
Application dismissed
Legal Topics
Sentencing, Indefinite Detention, Release on Licence, Sexual Offences

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 2 Authorities cited 1 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Applicant

Applicant

Respondent

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal / Judgment

  1. 1 Interpretation of 'willing' in section 59(1a)(a) of the Sentencing Act 2017 (SA)
  2. 2 Whether 'willing' is the converse of 'unwilling' as defined in section 57(1)
  3. 3 Whether the Supreme Court must exclude the likely effect of licence conditions when assessing willingness to control sexual instincts

Ratio Decidendi

'Willing' in section 59(1a)(a) does not simply mean the converse of 'unwilling' in section 57(1); the Supreme Court must assess willingness to control sexual instincts without regard to the likely effect of licence conditions.

Court Disposition

Application dismissed