NSW Caselaw
New South Wales Supreme Court
CITATION : R (Cth) v Petroulias (No. 7) [2007] NSWSC 16
HEARING DATE(S) : 11 December 2006
JUDGMENT DATE : 30 January 2007
JUDGMENT OF : Johnson J at 1
DECISION : See paragraphs 104 and 105 of judgment.
CATCHWORDS : CRIMINAL LAW - admissibility of evidence of six telephone conversations obtained by warrant under Telecommunications (Interception) Act 1979 (Cth) - whether evidence relevant to prosecution of Accused for alleged offences under ss.29D, 70 and 73 Crimes Act 1914 (Cth) - whether three conversations, if relevant, ought be rejected under s.135(a) Evidence Act 1995 upon basis that probative value substantially outweighed by danger that evidence might be unfairly prejudicial to Accused - evidence of each of six conversations admitted
Telecommunications (Interception) Act 1979 (Cth)) LEGISLATION CITED : Evidence Act 1995 Crimes Act 1914 (Cth)
R v Petroulias (No. 1) [2006] NSWSC 788 R v Serratore (1999) 48 NSWLR 101 CASES CITED : R v BD (1997) 94 A Crim R 131 Papakosmas v The Queen (1999) 196 CLR 297 Commonwealth of Australia v McLean (1996) 41 NSWLR 389 Gordon (Bankrupt), Official Trustee in Bankruptcy v Pike (No. 1) (Federal Court of Australia, Beaumont J, 1 September 1995)
PARTIES : Regina (Commonwealth) (Crown) Nikytas Nicholas Petroulias (Accused)
FILE NUMBER(S) : SC 2002/93
COUNSEL : Mr P Hastings QC; Mr C Hoy (Crown) Mr R Sutherland SC; Mr G Walsh (Accused)
SOLICITORS : Commonwealth Director of Public Prosecutions (Crown) Coadys (Accused)
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