NSW Caselaw
New South Wales Court of Criminal Appeal
CITATION : Regina v GLC [2000] NSWCCA 90 FILE NUMBER(S) : CCA 60430/99 HEARING DATE(S) : 1 February 2000 JUDGMENT DATE : 31 March 2000
PARTIES : Regina v GLC JUDGMENT OF : Sully J at 1; Simpson J at 1; Carruthers AJ at 1
LOWER COURT JURISDICTION : District Court LOWER COURT FILE NUMBER(S) : 98/41/0313 LOWER COURT JUDICIAL Garling DCJ OFFICER :
T L Buddin (Applicant) COUNSEL : M C Ramage QC (Crown)
Johnston Brien (Applicant) SOLICITORS : S E O'Connor (Crown)
CATCHWORDS : Criminal law - application for leave to appeal against interlocutory order refusing an application for separate trials - Crown seeking to rely upon tendency and coincidence evidence under ss97 and 98 of the Evidence Act 1995 - consideration of the appropriate procedure where question of possible concoction may arise between complainants in charges of sexual misconduct involving more than one complainant - such questions should be resolved in the District Court under Rule 11 of Part 53 - Criminal Procedure Rules. LEGISLATION CITED : Criminal Appeal Act, 1912; s5F; Evidence Act, 1995 ss97, 98, 101(2); District Court Rules; Criminal Procedure Rules Pt 53 r11. CASES CITED: Hoch v The Queen (1988) 165 CLR 292; Regina v Lockyer (1996) 89 ACrimR 457; Regina v Lock (1997) 91 ACrimR 356; Regina v AH (1997) 42 NSWLR 702. DECISION : Application for leave to appeal granted - appeal dismissed.
IN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEAL
CCA60430/99 SULLY J SIMPSON J CARRUTHERS AJ
We try to embed the page this law was scraped from. If the site blocks framing, you still get the link and a local excerpt.
Last checked with source on —
Checking whether the official page can be embedded…
Plain-English simplify of this law: a short summary, key points, and both sides of the argument. Generated on first view via Replicate, then cached. Vote on what helps your study.
No study brief is cached for this law yet. Sign up to generate a plain-English brief.
Sign up to generate