NSW Caselaw
Court of Appeal Supreme Court New South Wales Medium Neutral Citation: Polley v Johnson [2015] NSWCA 256 Hearing dates: 24 July 2015 Decision date: 27 August 2015 Before: Beazley P at [1]; McColl JA at [2]; Simpson JA at [3] Decision: (1) Leave to appeal granted;
(2) Appeal dismissed. Catchwords: APPEAL - search warrant - Law Enforcement (Powers and Responsibilities) Act 2002, s 48 - whether validly issued - whether issuing officer had reasonable grounds for issuing warrant - searchable offence nominated by applicant police officer - offence against Crimes Act 1900, s 326(2) - reprisals against judges, witnesses, jurors - connection with any judicial proceeding - whether judicial proceeding encompasses judicial proceeding contemplated but not commenced - role of issuing officer in deciding whether reasonable grounds for issuing warrant - whether required to consider or determine complex legal issues - Baker v Campbell [1983] HCA 39 - search warrant validly issued
APPEAL - whether search warrant had been sought for an ulterior motive - proposition never put to the witness - Browne v Dunn (1893) 6 R 67 - no evidence supporting proposition - leave to appeal granted - appeal dismissed Legislation Cited: Crimes Act 1900 (NSW), s 326(2) Crimes Act 1900 (NSW), ss 311, 315, 315A, 326 Law Enforcement (Powers and Responsibilities) Act 2002 (NSW), Pt 5, ss 3, 46, 46A, 47, 48, 62 Law Enforcement (Powers and Responsibilities) Regulation 2005 (NSW), cll 4, 6 Cases Cited: Baker v Campbell [1983] HCA 39; 153 CLR 52 Browne v Dunn (1893) 6 R 67 George v Rockett [1990] HCA 26; 170 CLR 104 O'Reilly v The Commissioners of the State Bank of Victoria [1983] HCA 47; 153 CLR 1 Polley v Johnson and Anor [2014] NSWSC 1191 Pyneboard Pty Ltd v Trade Practices Commission; Dunlop Olympic Ltd v Trade Practices Commission [1983] HCA 9; 152 CLR 328 R v Lansdell (NSWCCA, 22 May 1995, unreported) R v Orcher [1999] NSWCCA 356; 48 NSWLR 273 Category: Principal judgment Parties: Michelle Elizabeth Polley (Applicant) Belinda Johnson (First Respondent) Holly Wraith Smith (Second Respondent) Representation: Counsel: P Skinner (Applicant) M England (Respondents)
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