Inspector Nash v Bulga Underground Operations Pty Ltd (re Newstead) (2) [2015] NSWDC 30

Inspector Nash v Bulga Underground Operations Pty Ltd (re Newstead) (2) [2015] NSWDC 30

The Court accepted that its earlier treatment of particulars i.i, i.ii and i.iii required correction because it considered further particulars or items from the prosecutor's submissions but failed to relate them back to particulars i.i, i.ii and i.iii. The prosecutor made good her case on particulars i.i and i.iii, but not on particular i.ii.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
05 March 2015
Procedural Posture
Criminal / Consequential Orders; Slip Rule Correction
Outcome
The prosecutor made good her case on particulars i.i and i.iii, but not on particular i.ii.
Legal Topics
['slip Rule' 'particulars' 'mine Safety']
['criminal Law'] ['slip Rule' 'particulars' 'mine Safety']

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 1 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Procedural Posture

Criminal / Consequential Orders; Slip Rule Correction

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the Court should review and correct its treatment of particulars i.i, i.ii and i.iii under the slip rule.' 'Whether the prosecutor made good her case on particulars i.i, i.ii and i.iii.']

Ratio Decidendi

The Court accepted that its earlier treatment of particulars i.i, i.ii and i.iii required correction because it considered further particulars or items from the prosecutor's submissions but failed to relate them back to particulars i.i, i.ii and i.iii. The prosecutor made good her case on particulars i.i and i.iii, but not on particular i.ii.

Court Disposition

The prosecutor made good her case on particulars i.i and i.iii, but not on particular i.ii.

Orders

  • []