NSW Caselaw
New South Wales Court of Criminal Appeal
CITATION : R v. NARAYANAN & ANOR. [2002] NSWCCA 200 FILE NUMBER(S) : CCA 60768/01 HEARING DATE(S) : 26 April 2002 JUDGMENT DATE : 30 May 2002
Regina - respondent PARTIES : Natesan Narayanan - appellant Singapore Exchange & Finance Pty. Limited - appellant JUDGMENT OF : Hodgson JA at 1; Barr J; Greg James J
LOWER COURT JURISDICTION : District Court LOWER COURT FILE NUMBER(S) : 00/11/0811 LOWER COURT JUDICIAL Holt ADCJ OFFICER :
COUNSEL : Mr. T.A. Game SC with Mr. M. Buscombe for appellants Mr. P. Roberts SC with Mr. R. Bromwich for Crown SOLICITORS : David Giddy & Associates, Vaucluse for appellants Commonwealth DPP, Sydney for Crown CATCHWORDS : CRIMINAL LAW - Cash transaction - Structuring - Whether same events can amount to a significant cash transaction and also several non-reportable cash transactions LEGISLATION CITED : Financial Transactions Reports Act 1988 (Cth) ss.3, 7, 28, 31 Beckwith v The Queen (1976) 135 CLR 569 Leask v The Commonwealth (1996) 187 CLR 579 Maric v R (1978) 52 ALJR 631 CASES CITED: Question of Law Reserved (No.2) of 1998 (1998) 70 SASR 502 R V Hannes [2000] NSWCCA 503 R v Leask [1999] NSWCCA 33 R v Stewart (2001) 52 NSWLR 301 DECISION : 1. Appeal against conviction on counts 39 and 40 allowed, and those convictions quashed 2. Otherwise, appeal against convictions dismissed 3.Leave to appeal against sentences in respect of counts 51-54 and 57 and 58 granted, but appeals 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