REGINA v HADDAD & TREGLIA [2000] NSWCCA 351

REGINA v HADDAD & TREGLIA [2000] NSWCCA 351

The District Court ruling was appealable because its substance and effect was to withdraw the only evidence on which the Crown could rely. The evidence was not obtained in contravention of an Australian law: s19(1)(b)(iv) did not require the report to identify merely possible uses of the recorded conversations, and s22(2) did not require destruction of information relating to any prescribed offence merely because it was not the murder offence for which the warrant was issued. As there was no contravention of s19 or s22, the precondition for exclusion under s138 of the Evidence Act 1995 was not established.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
06 September 2000
Procedural Posture
Crown Appeal From Interlocutory Judgment or Order in Criminal Proceedings / Appeal to the New South Wales Court of Criminal Appeal Under S5 F(2) of the Criminal Appeal Act 1912 From a District Court Ruling Excluding Evidence
Outcome
Appeal allowed; ruling excluding the evidence set aside.
Legal Topics
['crown Appeal From Interlocutory Judgment or Order' 'exclusion of Improperly or Unlawfully Obtained Evidence' 'listening Device Warrants' 'reporting Obligations Under the Listening Devices Act 1984' 'destruction of Records Obtained by Listening Device']
['criminal Law' 'evidence' 'criminal Procedure'] ['crown Appeal From Interlocutory Judgment or Order' 'exclusion of Improperly or Unlawfully Obtained Evidence' 'listening Device Warrants' 'reporting Obligations Under the Listening Devices Act 1984' 'destruction of Records Obtained by Listening Device']

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

Crown Appeal From Interlocutory Judgment or Order in Criminal Proceedings / Appeal to the New South Wales Court of Criminal Appeal Under S5 F(2) of the Criminal Appeal Act 1912 From a District Court Ruling Excluding Evidence

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the District Court ruling excluding the tape recorded conversations was an interlocutory judgment or order for the purposes of s5F(2) of the Criminal Appeal Act 1912.' 'Whether the s19 report contravened s19(1)(b)(iv) of the Listening Devices Act 1984 by not referring to possible use of the recorded conversations in relation to armed robbery or later perjury proceedings.' 'Whether s22(2) of the Listening Devices Act 1984 required destruction of the recorded material because it did not relate to the murder offence for which the warrant was obtained.' 'Whether the precondition for exclusion under s138 of the Evidence Act 1995 was established.']

Ratio Decidendi

The District Court ruling was appealable because its substance and effect was to withdraw the only evidence on which the Crown could rely. The evidence was not obtained in contravention of an Australian law: s19(1)(b)(iv) did not require the report to identify merely possible uses of the recorded conversations, and s22(2) did not require destruction of information relating to any prescribed offence merely because it was not the murder offence for which the warrant was issued. As there was no contravention of s19 or s22, the precondition for exclusion under s138 of the Evidence Act 1995 was not established.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; ruling excluding the evidence set aside.

Orders

  • ['Appeal allowed.' 'Ruling that the evidence be rejected set aside.']