NSW Caselaw
Court of Criminal Appeal Supreme Court New South Wales Medium Neutral Citation: MAC v R [2017] NSWCCA 219 Hearing dates: 17 February 2017 Date of orders: 27 March 2017 Decision date: 08 September 2017 Before: Simpson JA at [1]; Johnson J at [132]; Fagan J at [133] Decision: (1) Leave to appeal granted;
(2) Appeal dismissed. Catchwords: CRIME – application for leave to appeal – interlocutory application – application for a permanent stay of proceedings – where applicant was compulsorily examined at the Australian Crime Commission before being charged – where impropriety on behalf of investigating police officers – whether irremediable prejudice occasioned to the applicant – whether impropriety rendered the proceedings an abuse of process Legislation Cited: Australian Crime Commission Act 2002 (Cth), ss 7B, 7C, 24A, 25A, 28, 30 Crimes Act 1914 (Cth), s 23L, Pt 1C Criminal Appeal Act 2012 (NSW), s 5F Criminal Assets Recovery Act 1990 (NSW) Criminal Code (Cth), ss 11.1(1), 307.5(1) Criminal Procedure Act 1986 (NSW), ss 130A, 139 Customs Act 1901 (Cth), s 233BABA Evidence Act 1995 (NSW), ss 138, 139 New South Wales Crime Commission Act 1985 (NSW) Cases Cited: Commissioner of the Australian Federal Police v Zhao (2015) 255 CLR 46; [2015] HCA 5 DAO v R (2011) 81 NSWLR 568; [2011] NSWCCA 63 Hammond v Commonwealth (1982) 152 CLR 63; [1982] HCA 42 House v The King (1936) 55 CLR 499; [1936] HCA 40 Jago v The District Court of NSW (1989) 168 CLR 23; [1989] HCA 46 Lee v NSW Crime Commission (2013) 251 CLR 196; [2013] HCA 39 Lee v The Queen (2014) 253 CLR 455; [2014] HCA 20 Moti v The Queen (2011) 245 CLR 456; [2011] HCA 50 Potter v Minahan (1908) 7 CLR 277; [1908] HCA 63 R v Bailey (1988) 36 A Crim R 30 R v Independent Broad-based Anti-corruption Commissioner (2016) 256 CLR 459; [2016] HCA 8 R v Powch (1988) 14 NSWLR 136 R v Seller; R v McCarthy (2015) 89 NSWLR 155; [2015] NSWCCA 76 R v X [2014] NSWCCA 168 Ridgeway v The Queen (1995) 184 CLR 19; [1995] HCA 66 Rogers v The Queen (1994) 181 CLR 251; [1994] HCA 42 Steffan v R (1993) 30 NSWLR 633 X7 v Australian Crime Commission (2013) 248 CLR 92; [2013] HCA 29 X7 v R (2014) 292 FLR 57; [2014] NSWCCA 273 Category: Principal judgment Parties: MAC (Applicant) Regina (Respondent) Representation: Counsel: M Thangaraj SC (Applicant) P McDonald SC (Respondent)
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