Hayward v R [2018] NSWCCA 104

Court of Criminal Appeal Supreme Court New South Wales Medium Neutral Citation: Hayward v R [2018] NSWCCA 104 Hearing dates: 12 February 2018 Date of orders: 04 June 2018 Decision date: 04 June 2018 Before: Bathurst CJ at [1]; Hoeben CJ at CL at [87]; Price J at [88]; Fullerton J at [89]; Garling J at [94] Decision: (1) Grant the applicant leave to appeal.

(2) Dismiss the appeal.

(3) Remit the proceedings to the District Court of New South Wales at Sydney on 15 June 2018. Catchwords: STATUTORY INTERPRETATION – Children and Young Persons (Care and Protection) Act 1998 (NSW) s 29(1)(d)(iii) – whether reports made to Department of Family and Community Services admissible in criminal proceedings in Supreme Court

STATUTORY INTERPRETATION – principle of legality – accused's right to a fair trial – whether Children and Young Persons (Care and Protection) Act 1998 (NSW) s 29(1)(d) was intended to abrogate the accused's right to a fair trial

APPEALS – precedent – circumstances in which Court of Criminal Appeal will depart from previous decisions – whether The Application of the Attorney-General dated 4 April 2014 [2014] NSWCCA 251 ought to be followed Legislation Cited: Child Welfare (Amendment) 1977 (NSW) Child Welfare Act 1939 (NSW) Children (Care and Protection) Act 1987 (NSW) Children and Young Persons (Care and Protection) Act 1998 (NSW) Children and Young Persons (Care and Protection) Amendment Act 2010 (NSW) Children and Young Persons (Care and Protection) Miscellaneous Amendments Act 2000 (NSW) Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2013 (NSW) Crimes Act 1900 (NSW) Criminal Appeal Act 1912 (NSW) Criminal Procedure Act 1986 (NSW) Interpretation Act 1987 (NSW) Victims Rights and Support Act 2013 (NSW) Cases Cited: Alcan (NT) Alumina Pty Ltd v Commissioner of Territory Revenue (NT) (2009) 239 CLR 27; [2009] HCA 41 Alister v The Queen (1983) 154 CLR 404; [1984] HCA 85 Bropho v Western Australia (1990) 171 CLR 1; [1990] HCA 24 Coco v The Queen (1993) 179 CLR 427; [1994] HCA 15 Commissioner for Railways (NSW) v Agalianos (1955) 92 CLR 390; [1955] HCA 27 Director-General, Department of Family and Community Services v FEW [2013] NSWSC 1448 Electrolux Home Products Pty Ltd v Australian Workers' Union (2004) 221 CLR 309; [2004] HCA 40 Federal Commissioner of Taxation v Consolidated Media Holdings Ltd (2012) 250 CLR 503; [2012] HCA 55 Gett v Tabet (2009) 254 ALR 504; [2009] NSWCA 76 Joye v Beach Petroleum NL (1996) 67 FCR 275 Lacey v Attorney-General (Qld) (2011) 242 CLR 573; [2011] HCA 10 Lee v New South Wales Crime Commission (2013) 251 CLR 196; [2013] HCA 39 Lee v The Queen (2014) 253 CLR 455; [2014] HCA 20 McElwaine v The Owners – Strata Plan 75975 [2017] NSWCA 239 PMT Partners Pty Ltd (in liq) v Australian National Parks and Wildlife Service (1995) 184 CLR 301; [1995] HCA 36 Potter v Minahan (1908) 7 CLR 277; [1908] HCA 63 Project Blue Sky Inc v Australian Broadcasting Authority (1998) 194 CLR 355; [1998] HCA 28 SZTAL v Minister for Immigration and Border Protection (2017) 91 ALJR 936; [2017] HCA 34 The Application of the Attorney-General for New South Wales dated 4 April 2014 (2014) 246 A Crim R 150; [2014] NSWCCA 251 Thiess v Collector of Customs (2014) 250 CLR 664; [2014] HCA 12 Tooheys Ltd v Commissioner of Stamp Duties (NSW) (1961) 105 CLR 602; [1961] HCA 35 Undershaft (No 1) Ltd v Federal Commissioner of Taxation (2009) 175 FCR 150; [2009] FCA 41 X7 v Australian Crime Commission (2013) 248 CLR 92; [2013] HCA 29 Category: Principal judgment Parties: Hayward (a pseudonym) (applicant) Crown (respondent) Representation: Counsel: H Dhanji SC with S Buchen (applicant) S Dowling SC with H Roberts (respondent)