R v Agius; R v Abibadra; R v Jandagi; R v Zerafa [2011] NSWSC 367
A single continuing conspiracy spanning two legislative regimes may legitimately be prosecuted as two counts, reflecting the time frames governed by each regime. Count 2 is not duplicitous because pleading statutory alternatives within s 135.4(5) does not equate to charging multiple offences.
- Parties
- Prosecutor: Regina (Crown); Defendant: Robert Francis Agius; Defendant: Carol Abibadra; Defendant: Deborah Judith Jandagi; Defendant: Kevin Zerafa
- Jurisdiction
- Australia
- Judgment Date
- 04 May 2011
- Procedural Posture
- Criminal / Interlocutory Application
- Outcome
- Applications for stay refused.
- Legal Topics
- Conspiracy to Defraud the Commonwealth, Duplicity, Statutory Interpretation, Transitional Provisions
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Regina (Crown)
Prosecutor
Robert Francis Agius
Defendant
Carol Abibadra
Defendant
Deborah Judith Jandagi
Defendant
Kevin Zerafa
Defendant
Procedural Posture
Criminal / Interlocutory Application
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether a permanent stay should be granted on count 2 of indictment alleging conspiracy under Criminal Code Act 1995
- 2 Whether count 2 of indictment is duplicitous under s 135.4(5) of the Criminal Code
Ratio Decidendi
A single continuing conspiracy spanning two legislative regimes may legitimately be prosecuted as two counts, reflecting the time frames governed by each regime. Count 2 is not duplicitous because pleading statutory alternatives within s 135.4(5) does not equate to charging multiple offences.
Court Disposition
Applications for stay refused.
Orders
- Permanent stay of count 2 refused.
- Claims for duplicity rejected.
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