Nash v R [2019] NSWCCA 124

Nash v R [2019] NSWCCA 124

The perjury prosecution based on evidence of the quantity of alcohol consumed did not directly contradict or controvert the acquittal for driving under the influence, as the acquittal was based on a range of factors not solely or decisively the applicant's evidence about number of beers. There is no manifest inconsistency between the perjury charge and the acquittal, and the prosecution does not amount to an abuse of process under double jeopardy or incontrovertibility principles. Therefore, the application for permanent stay was properly refused.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
17 June 2019
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Leave to Appeal and Appeal Against Interlocutory Judgment
Outcome
Leave to appeal granted; appeal dismissed; permanent stay refused
Legal Topics
['double Jeopardy' 'abuse of Process' 'perjury' 'stay of Proceedings' 'incontrovertibility Principle']
['criminal Law'] ['double Jeopardy' 'abuse of Process' 'perjury' 'stay of Proceedings' 'incontrovertibility Principle']

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 Appeal / Leave to Appeal and Appeal Against Interlocutory Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether the perjury prosecution would improperly contradict or call into question the applicant's earlier acquittal for driving under the influence of alcohol" "Whether the Crown's subsequent prosecution constitutes an abuse of process based on double jeopardy principles"]

Ratio Decidendi

The perjury prosecution based on evidence of the quantity of alcohol consumed did not directly contradict or controvert the acquittal for driving under the influence, as the acquittal was based on a range of factors not solely or decisively the applicant's evidence about number of beers. There is no manifest inconsistency between the perjury charge and the acquittal, and the prosecution does not amount to an abuse of process under double jeopardy or incontrovertibility principles. Therefore, the application for permanent stay was properly refused.

Court Disposition

Leave to appeal granted; appeal dismissed; permanent stay refused

Orders

  • ['Grant leave to appeal' 'Dismiss the appeal']