X v R [2011] NSWCCA 202

X v R [2011] NSWCCA 202

The indictment disclosed an offence known to law because the alleged intended advantage, namely obtaining information to determine whether the complainant had been near the particular address earlier that day, was capable of being an "advantage" under s 86(1)(b) of the Crimes Act 1900. The advantage did not have to be unlawful in itself, and on the Crown case it stemmed from the taking and detention of the complainant.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
02 September 2011
Procedural Posture
Criminal Application for Leave to Appeal Against Interlocutory Judgment or Order / Appeal From District Court Refusal of Application to Quash Indictment
Outcome
Leave to appeal granted; appeal dismissed.
Legal Topics
['application for Leave to Appeal' 'interlocutory Order' 'quashing an Indictment' 'specially Aggravated Kidnapping' 'meaning of Advantage Under S 86(1)(b) Crimes Act 1900']
['criminal Law' 'criminal Procedure'] ['application for Leave to Appeal' 'interlocutory Order' 'quashing an Indictment' 'specially Aggravated Kidnapping' 'meaning of Advantage Under S 86(1)(b) Crimes Act 1900']

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

Criminal Application for Leave to Appeal Against Interlocutory Judgment or Order / Appeal From District Court Refusal of Application to Quash Indictment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether leave should be granted under s 5F(3) of the Criminal Appeal Act 1912 to appeal against the interlocutory order refusing to quash the indictment.' 'Whether the indictment disclosed an offence known to law under s 86 of the Crimes Act 1900.' 'Whether obtaining information about whether the complainant had been near a particular address earlier that day was an "advantage" within s 86(1)(b) of the Crimes Act 1900.' 'Whether an "advantage" under s 86(1)(b) must itself be illegal or incapable of being obtained lawfully.']

Ratio Decidendi

The indictment disclosed an offence known to law because the alleged intended advantage, namely obtaining information to determine whether the complainant had been near the particular address earlier that day, was capable of being an "advantage" under s 86(1)(b) of the Crimes Act 1900. The advantage did not have to be unlawful in itself, and on the Crown case it stemmed from the taking and detention of the complainant.

Court Disposition

Leave to appeal granted; appeal dismissed.

Orders

  • ['Grant leave to appeal.' 'Dismiss the appeal.']