NSW Caselaw
Supreme Court New South Wales
Medium Neutral Citation: Crowe v DPP (NSW) [2015] NSWSC 747 Hearing dates: 9 June 2015 Decision date: 16 June 2015 Before: Hoeben CJ at CL Decision: Summons dismissed with costs. Catchwords: CRIMINAL LAW AND PROCEDURE – Plaintiff committed for trial on murder charge – claim magistrate failed to properly exercise discretions under s 91 Criminal Procedure Act 1986 – Plaintiff sought judicial review by Supreme Court – danger of fragmentation of criminal process – as DPP had found a bill of indictment quashing the committal would be futile – analogous relief available from pre-trial processes – no case made for intervention by Supreme Court. Legislation Cited: Crimes Act 1900 – s 61J(2)(d) Criminal Procedure Act 1986 – s 91 Supreme Court Act 1970 – s 69 Cases Cited: Bagshaw v Carter & Ors [2006] NSWCA 113 Director of Public Prosecutions v Losurdo & Anor (1998) 44 NSWLR 618 Director of Public Prosecutions v PM [2006] NSWCCA 297; 67 NSWLR 46 Grassby v R [1989] HCA 45; 168 CLR 1 Hanna v Kearney (Studdert J, 28 May 1998, unreported) Joseph Anthony Basha (1989) 39 A Crim R 337 Sergi v Director of Public Prosecutions (Court of Appeal, unreported, 10 September 1991) V v McDonald & Ors [1995] NSWCA 487 Category: Principal judgment Parties: Amanda Crowe – Plaintiff Director of Public Prosecutions (NSW) – First Defendant The Local Court of NSW – Second Defendant Representation: Counsel: Mr W Terracini SC – Plaintiff Mr K McKay – First Defendant Submitting Appearance – Second Defendant
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