Mikic v Local Court of NSW & Anor [2013] NSWSC 334

Mikic v Local Court of NSW & Anor [2013] NSWSC 334

The prosecution was not required to particularise which specific acts allegedly caused actual bodily harm, as all alleged acts formed a closely related activity constituting a single assault, and sufficient particulars had already been provided for the applicant to know the case against him.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
05 April 2013
Procedural Posture
Interlocutory Application / Summons Seeking Prohibition—determined
Outcome
Summons dismissed with costs.
Legal Topics
['particularisation' 'assault Occasioning Actual Bodily Harm' 'procedural Fairness' 'latent Duplicity']
['criminal'] ['particularisation' 'assault Occasioning Actual Bodily Harm' 'procedural Fairness' 'latent Duplicity']

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

Interlocutory Application / Summons Seeking Prohibition—determined

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the prosecution was required to provide further particulars identifying which specific acts allegedly caused actual bodily harm.' 'Whether the absence of particulars amounted to a breach of procedural fairness justifying relief in the nature of prohibition.']

Ratio Decidendi

The prosecution was not required to particularise which specific acts allegedly caused actual bodily harm, as all alleged acts formed a closely related activity constituting a single assault, and sufficient particulars had already been provided for the applicant to know the case against him.

Court Disposition

Summons dismissed with costs.

Orders

  • ['Summons dismissed.' 'Plaintiff to pay costs.']