R v Ljubicic [2017] NSWCCA 283

Court of Criminal Appeal Supreme Court New South Wales Medium Neutral Citation: R v Ljubicic [2017] NSWCCA 283 Hearing dates: 23 November 2017 Date of orders: 23 November 2017 Decision date: 23 November 2017 Before: Hoeben CJ at CL at [1]; Davies J [2]; Adamson J [3] Decision: (1) Allow the Crown appeal. (2) Set aside the orders of Maiden DCJ refusing to admit the recorded interview (ERISP). Catchwords: APPEAL – Criminal Appeal Act 1912 (NSW), s 5F(3A) – whether exclusion of evidence substantially weakens Crown case – HELD – ERISP met threshold test as it was inconsistent with version given by respondent in pretext call

APPEAL – Evidence Act 1995 (NSW), s 90 – whether ERISP ought be excluded on grounds of unfairness – alleged unfairness constituted by investigating police not putting their knowledge of content of pretext call to respondent in ERISP – distinction between exclusion under ss 138 and 90

CRIMINAL LAW – no procedural fairness required of police when investigating alleged commission of criminal offence Legislation Cited: Criminal Appeal Act 1912 (NSW), s 5F(3A) Criminal Procedure Act 1986 (NSW), ss 141, 142, 143, 144, 146 Evidence Act 1995 (NSW), ss 90, 138 Law Enforcement (Powers and Responsibilities) Act 2002 (NSW) Listening Devices Act 1984 (NSW) Cases Cited: CPCF v Minister for Immigration and Border Protection (2015) 255 CLR 514; [2015] HCA 1 Em v The Queen (2007) 232 CLR 67; [2007] HCA 46 LDF Enterprise Pty Ltd v State of New South Wales [2017] NSWCA 89 Mallard v The Queen (2005) 224 CLR 125; [2005] HCA 68 R v DRF [2015] NSWCCA 181 R v ELD [2004] NSWCCA 219 R v Shamouil (2006) 66 NSWLR 228; [2006] NSWCCA 112 R v GAC [2007] NSWCCA 315 The Queen v Swaffield; Pavic v The Queen (1998) 192 CLR 159; [1998] HCA 1 Category: Principal judgment Parties: Regina (Applicant) Robert Ljubicic (Respondent) Representation: Counsel: S Dowling SC/R Cooley (Applicant) S Hall (Respondent)