Coates v The Queen [1957] HCA 11
The grounds advanced, particularly concerning the sufficiency of proof to admit the deposition, do not raise any real question of law for which special leave should be granted; the admission of the deposition, even if erroneous, did not result in a substantial miscarriage of justice given the abundance of other evidence supporting the verdict.
- Jurisdiction
- Australia
- Procedural Posture
- Application for Special Leave to Appeal / Decision on Application for Special Leave to Appeal
- Outcome
- application for special leave to appeal refused
- Legal Topics
- ['admissibility of Depositions' 'proof of Absence of Witness' 'special Leave to Appeal' 'automatism Defence' 'miscarriage of Justice']
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Procedural Posture
Application for Special Leave to Appeal / Decision on Application for Special Leave to Appeal
Legal Issues
- 1 ['Whether sufficient foundation was laid for the admission of a deposition under s. 107 of the Evidence Act 1906-1948 W.A. due to proof of absence of a witness from the State' 'Whether the erroneous admission of the deposition amounted to a substantial miscarriage of justice' 'Whether the case warranted the grant of special leave to appeal']
Ratio Decidendi
The grounds advanced, particularly concerning the sufficiency of proof to admit the deposition, do not raise any real question of law for which special leave should be granted; the admission of the deposition, even if erroneous, did not result in a substantial miscarriage of justice given the abundance of other evidence supporting the verdict.
Court Disposition
application for special leave to appeal refused
Orders
- ['application dismissed']
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment