NSW Caselaw
New South Wales Court of Criminal Appeal
CITATION : R v Subramanian [2002] NSWCCA 372 FILE NUMBER(S) : CCA 60312/02 HEARING DATE(S) : 4 September 2002 JUDGMENT DATE : 25 November 2002
PARTIES : Regina Kala Devi Subramanian JUDGMENT OF : Beazley JA at 1; Sully J at 62; Simpson J at 63
LOWER COURT JURISDICTION : District Court LOWER COURT FILE NUMBER(S) : 01/00/1307 LOWER COURT JUDICIAL Luland J OFFICER :
COUNSEL : P G Ingram (Crown) C Waterstreet (Appellant) SOLICITORS : S E O'Connor (Crown) McClellands (Appellant) CATCHWORDS : Criminal law - intent to pervert the course of justice - false statutory declaration - false evidence - unfit to be tried - whether verdicts inconsistent - stay in proceedings - admission of evidence - special proceedings - whether trial unfair and oppressive - mental health - exercise of discretion Crimes Act 1900 (NSW), ss 312, 319 Mental Health (Criminal Procedure) Act 1990 (NSW) ss 11A, 16, 18, 19, 21, 22 and 23 LEGISLATION CITED : Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999 (NSW), s 9 Justices Act 1902 (NSW), s 100A Listening Devices Act 1984 (NSW) Criminal Appeal Act 1904 (NSW) s 5F Jago v The District Court of NSW (1989) 168 CLR 23 House v The King (1936) 55 CLR 499 R v Alexandroaia (1994) 81 A Crim R 286 R v H [2002] NSWCCA 355 CASES CITED: R v Markuleski (2001) 52 NSWLR 82 R v Rogerson (1992) 174 CLR 268 Subramanian v R [2000] NSWCCA 441 Walton v Gardiner, Herron and Gill (1993) 177 CLR 378 Thornberry v The Queen (1993) 69 ALJR 777 DECISION : Appeal dismissed
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