CONSTITUTIONAL LAW (Cth) - Judicial power of Commonwealth - Admissibility of evidence - Where information and records obtained pursuant to warrants - Where Surveillance Legislation (Confirmation of Application) Act 2024 (Cth) ("Confirmation of Application Act") deems information and records obtained under specified warrants to have been lawfully obtained - Whether Confirmation of Application Act invalid - Whether Confirmation of Application Act impermissible exercise by Parliament of judicial power of Commonwealth - Whether Confirmation of Application Act impermissibly interferes with and undermines institutional integrity of courts vested with federal jurisdiction.
CONSTITUTIONAL LAW (Cth) - Judicial power of Commonwealth - Admissibility of evidence - Where information and records obtained pursuant to warrants - Where Surveillance Legislation (Confirmation of Application) Act 2024 (Cth) ("Confirmation of Application Act") deems information and records obtained under specified warrants to have been lawfully obtained - Whether Confirmation of Application Act invalid - Whether Confirmation of Application Act impermissible exercise by Parliament of judicial power of Commonwealth - Whether Confirmation of Application Act impermissibly interferes with and undermines institutional integrity of courts vested with federal jurisdiction.
WORDS AND PHRASES - "admissible", "communication", "criminal proceedings", "evidence", "exercise of judicial power", "illegally obtained", "inadmissible", "intercepting a communication", "interfere with the integrity of courts", "judicial power", "legislative power", "statutory concept", "telecommunications system", "undue impairment of judicial power", "unlawfully intercepted", "usurpation of judicial power", "warrant".
Constitution, Ch III.
Surveillance Legislation (Confirmation of Application) Act 2024 (Cth), ss 4, 5, 6. 7.
Telecommunications (Interception and Access) Act 1979 (Cth), ss 7, 63, 77.
ACCIDENT COMPENSATION - Appeal - Application for extension of time within which to seek leave to appeal - Workplace injury - Serious injury application - Function of cervical spine - Applicant given leave to commence proceeding for pain and suffering damages only - Whether judge erred in refusing applicant leave to commence proceeding for pecuniary loss damages - Loss of earning capacity - Whether applicant suffered permanent loss of earning capacity of 40 per cent or more - Suitable employment - Proposed appeal having no real prospect of success - Futile to grant extension of time application - Application for extension of time refused.
ACCIDENT COMPENSATION - Appeal - Application for extension of time within which to seek leave to appeal - Workplace injury - Serious injury application - Function of cervical spine - Applicant given leave to commence proceeding for pain and suffering damages only - Whether judge erred in refusing applicant leave to commence proceeding for pecuniary loss damages - Loss of earning capacity - Whether applicant suffered permanent loss of earning capacity of 40 per cent or more - Suitable employment - Proposed appeal having no real prospect of success - Futile to grant extension of time application - Application for extension of time refused.
PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE - Applications to adduce fresh evidence - Whether by reasonable diligence proposed evidence could have been adduced at trial - Whether tendering of proposed evidence at trial would have produced opposite result - Applications to adduce fresh evidence refused.
Workplace Injury Rehabilitation and Compensation Act 2013, ss 325(2)(b), (c), (e) and (f) and 335(2) and (3).
Commonwealth Bank of Australia v Quade (1991) 178 CLR 134; Giles v Jeffrey [2016] VSCA 314; Roleff v Chubb Insurance Co of Australia Pty Ltd (2011) 31 VR 235; The Herald & Weekly Times Ltd v Jessop [2014] VSCA 292; Yirga- Denbu v Victorian WorkCover Authority (2018) 57 VR 545; Weldemichael v ID Sales & Repairs Pty Ltd [2019] VSCA 68; Victorian WorkCover Authority v Papaconstantinou [2021] VSCA 145, applied.
ACCIDENT COMPENSATION - Transport accident - Serious injury - Appeal against finding by trial judge that applicant's injury not a 'serious injury' for the purposes of s 93 of Transport Accident Act 1986 - Applicant's motorbike collided with truck - Psychiatric injury - Applicant suffers from Conversion Disorder with hand-twitching and pseudo-neurological symptomology - Where transport accident a cause of psychiatric injury - Whether trial judge erred in concluding that applicant's injury not 'serious' - Whether trial judge failed to consider consequences and symptoms associated with applicant's disorder when finding transport accident a cause of psychiatric injury - Applicant's symptoms have abated - Applicant's professional and personal life not severely affected by injury - Applicant's pre-existing anxiety and depression not part of claim - Application for leave to appeal refused.
ACCIDENT COMPENSATION - Transport accident - Serious injury - Appeal against finding by trial judge that applicant's injury not a 'serious injury' for the purposes of s 93 of Transport Accident Act 1986 - Applicant's motorbike collided with truck - Psychiatric injury - Applicant suffers from Conversion Disorder with hand-twitching and pseudo-neurological symptomology - Where transport accident a cause of psychiatric injury - Whether trial judge erred in concluding that applicant's injury not 'serious' - Whether trial judge failed to consider consequences and symptoms associated with applicant's disorder when finding transport accident a cause of psychiatric injury - Applicant's symptoms have abated - Applicant's professional and personal life not severely affected by injury - Applicant's pre-existing anxiety and depression not part of claim - Application for leave to appeal refused.
Transport Accident Act 1986, s 93.
Taylor v Transport Accident Commission [2022] VSCA 269; Forssell v CIP Constructions (Australia) Pty Ltd [2020] VSCA 304; Noori v Topaz Fine Foods Pty Ltd [2018] VSCA 323; Hunter v Transport Accident Commission & Anor [2005] VSCA 1; Whisprun Pty Ltd v Dixon (2003) 200 ALR 447, considered.
Mobilio v Balliotis [1998] 3 VR 833; Humphries v Poljak [1992] 2 VR 129; Transport Accident Commission v Katanas (2017) 262 CLR 550; Franklin v Ubaldi Foods Pty Ltd [2005] VSCA 317; Woolworths Ltd v Warfe [2013] VSCA 22; Nichols & Anor v Robinson [2001] VSCA 11, referred to.
PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE - Appeal - Application for security for costs - No dispute as to entitlement to security for costs - Quantum of security - Orders made for security for costs.
PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE - Appeal - Application for security for costs - No dispute as to entitlement to security for costs - Quantum of security - Orders made for security for costs.
Cwalina v Rose [2025] VSCA 53; Mikkelsen v Li [2022] VSCA 126; Szwarcbord v Charbord Investments Pty Ltd [2024] VSCA 92, applied.
PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE - Appeal - Overarching obligations - Whether respondents breached overarching obligations - Application under s 29 of Civil Procedure Act 2010 for orders against respondents for alleged breaches of overarching obligations - Applicant failing to prove any breach of overarching obligations - Application dismissed by primary judge - Proposed appeal having no prospects of success - Application for leave to appeal totally without merit - Application for leave to appeal refused.
PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE - Appeal - Overarching obligations - Whether respondents breached overarching obligations - Application under s 29 of Civil Procedure Act 2010 for orders against respondents for alleged breaches of overarching obligations - Applicant failing to prove any breach of overarching obligations - Application dismissed by primary judge - Proposed appeal having no prospects of success - Application for leave to appeal totally without merit - Application for leave to appeal refused.
Civil Procedure Act 2010, ss 16, 17, 18, 21 and 29; Supreme Court Act 1986, s 14D.
PROPERTY LAW - Application for possession of property by mother against son under o 53 of the Supreme Court (General Civil Procedure) Rules 2015 granted by Associate Justice - Applicant self-represented in proceeding below - Applicant filed appearance but did not file any material in opposition and did not attend Trial Division hearing - Whether Associate Justice erred in declaring that at that stage of the proceeding there was no question to be tried - Whether Associate Justice erred in declaring that a judgment for possession under o 53 was justified and the respondent was entitled to possession of the land at that stage of the proceeding - Leave to appeal refused.
PROPERTY LAW - Application for possession of property by mother against son under o 53 of the Supreme Court (General Civil Procedure) Rules 2015 granted by Associate Justice - Applicant self-represented in proceeding below - Applicant filed appearance but did not file any material in opposition and did not attend Trial Division hearing - Whether Associate Justice erred in declaring that at that stage of the proceeding there was no question to be tried - Whether Associate Justice erred in declaring that a judgment for possession under o 53 was justified and the respondent was entitled to possession of the land at that stage of the proceeding - Leave to appeal refused.
Supreme Court (General Civil Procedure) Rules 2025, o 53.
CRIMINAL LAW - Appeal - Conviction - Murder - Causation - Deceased suffered stab wounds and brain injuries - Medical evidence that cause of death was multiple stab wounds in the setting of blunt head trauma - Whether judge erred in directions to jury on causation - Proposed ground of appeal without merit - Application for extension of time in which to seek leave to appeal against conviction refused.
CRIMINAL LAW - Appeal - Conviction - Murder - Causation - Deceased suffered stab wounds and brain injuries - Medical evidence that cause of death was multiple stab wounds in the setting of blunt head trauma - Whether judge erred in directions to jury on causation - Proposed ground of appeal without merit - Application for extension of time in which to seek leave to appeal against conviction refused.
CRIMINAL LAW - Application for extension of time for leave to appeal against sentence - Manifest excess - Aggravated burglary with intent to steal - Sexual assault - Where applicant on bail and community correction order at time of offending - Where applicant sexually assaulted the complainant after entering home with intention to steal - Aggravated burglary an inherently serious offence - Sexual assault is serious offending where vulnerable victim lying asleep in her home assaulted by a trespasser - Sentence and orders for cumulation wholly adequate in the circumstances - Application for extension of time dismissed.
CRIMINAL LAW - Application for extension of time for leave to appeal against sentence - Manifest excess - Aggravated burglary with intent to steal - Sexual assault - Where applicant on bail and community correction order at time of offending - Where applicant sexually assaulted the complainant after entering home with intention to steal - Aggravated burglary an inherently serious offence - Sexual assault is serious offending where vulnerable victim lying asleep in her home assaulted by a trespasser - Sentence and orders for cumulation wholly adequate in the circumstances - Application for extension of time dismissed.
Crimes Act 1958, ss 40, 74(1), 77, 82(1), 88, 321M; Bail Act 1977, s 30B; Crimes Amendment (Sexual Offences) Act 2016.
Brown v The Queen [2021] VSCA 204; Comensoli v The Queen [2020] VSCA 2 considered; Traeger (a pseudonym) v The Queen [2019] VSCA 231; Perry v The King [2023] VSCA 218, distinguished.
CRIMINAL LAW - Appeal - Conviction - Rape by failing to withdraw - Two incidents of sexual penetration of a sex worker in a commercial setting - Whether verdicts unreasonable or cannot be supported having regard to the evidence - Appeal allowed - Judgments and verdicts of acquittal entered.
CRIMINAL LAW - Appeal - Conviction - Rape by failing to withdraw - Two incidents of sexual penetration of a sex worker in a commercial setting - Whether verdicts unreasonable or cannot be supported having regard to the evidence - Appeal allowed - Judgments and verdicts of acquittal entered.
CRIMINAL LAW - Appeal - Conviction - Rape by failing to withdraw - Two incidents of sexual penetration of a sex worker in a commercial setting - Police recorded taking of complainant's statement - Defence counsel played recording to complainant - Complainant distressed - Whether substantial miscarriage of justice resulted - Appeal allowed.
CRIMINAL LAW - Appeal - Conviction - Rape by failing to withdraw - Two incidents of sexual penetration of a sex worker in a commercial setting - Newspaper article published in course of trial concerning assaults on sex workers - Cross-examination disjointed as a result of complainant's conduct - Applications to discharge jury refused - Whether substantial miscarriage of justice - Appeal allowed.
CRIMINAL LAW - Appeal - Conviction - Seven prosecutions relating to drug trafficking - Guilty pleas entered to charges in three prosecutions in exchange for discontinuation of remaining prosecutions - Barrister registered as police informer and informing on applicant - Other clients persuaded to give evidence against applicant - Breaches of barrister's professional duties - Barrister and police shared common purpose of ensuring applicant charged with and convicted of serious offences - Applicant convicted and exhausted rights of appeal without knowing of misconduct - Whether substantial miscarriage of justice - Leave to appeal granted - Appeal allowed in part.
CRIMINAL LAW - Appeal - Conviction - Seven prosecutions relating to drug trafficking - Guilty pleas entered to charges in three prosecutions in exchange for discontinuation of remaining prosecutions - Barrister registered as police informer and informing on applicant - Other clients persuaded to give evidence against applicant - Breaches of barrister's professional duties - Barrister and police shared common purpose of ensuring applicant charged with and convicted of serious offences - Applicant convicted and exhausted rights of appeal without knowing of misconduct - Whether substantial miscarriage of justice - Leave to appeal granted - Appeal allowed in part.
CRIMINAL LAW - Appeal - Conviction - Whether common purpose of barrister and State police undermined administration of justice - Barrister secured cooperation of clients to act as witnesses against applicant - Breaches of professional duties to clients - Method used to obtain evidence grossly improper - Fundamental departure from proper processes for trial - State conviction involving substantial miscarriage of justice - Order for acquittal - Common purpose not infecting Commonwealth prosecution - No fundamental departure from proper processes for trial - Misconduct having capacity to affect result in Commonwealth prosecution - Conviction not inevitable - Commonwealth conviction involving substantial miscarriage of justice - Order for retrial - Further State conviction unaffected - Baini v The Queen (2012) 246 CLR 469; Awad v The Queen (2022) 275 CLR 421; Karam v The King [2023] VSCA 318, applied.
CRIMINAL LAW - Appeal - Conviction - Whether common purpose of barrister and State police undermined appearance of administration of justice - Whether fair-minded observer might reasonably apprehend that accused might have been deprived of fair trial - Test not applicable where Court has found guilty pleas did not involve substantial miscarriage of justice - R v Szabo [2001] 2 Qd R 214, distinguished.
CRIMINAL LAW - Appeal - Conviction - Guilty pleas - Integrity of pleas impugned by non-disclosure of misconduct of barrister and police - Non-disclosure affecting assessment of strength of prosecution case on subject charges and charges discontinued by agreement - Whether prosecutions could not in law have proceeded - Affront to justice - Whether non-disclosure had capacity to affect outcome of prosecutions - Whether issuable question of guilt - Peters [No 2] v The Queen (2019) 60 VR 231; Karam v The King [2023] VSCA 318; Honeysett v DPP (NSW) [2023] NSWCCA 215, applied - Leave to appeal granted - Appeal allowed in part.
CRIMINAL LAW - Appeal - Conviction - Guilty pleas - Integrity of pleas impugned by non-disclosure of misconduct of barrister and police in connection with applicant's extradition - Whether reasonable prospect of permanent stay of prosecutions on grounds of misconduct - No reasonable prospect of stay - Strickland v DPP (Cth) (2018) 266 CLR 325; Ballard v The King [2024] VSCA 26, applied.
CRIMINAL LAW - Appeal - Conviction - Guilty pleas - Integrity of pleas impugned by non-disclosure of misconduct of barrister and police - Whether non-disclosure had capacity to affect outcome of prosecutions - Whether evidence improperly obtained - Evidence would have been excluded from trials of subject charges and discontinued charges - Evidence Act 2008, s 138.
CRIMINAL LAW - Appeal - Second or subsequent appeal - Principles governing leave - Whether fresh evidence 'compelling' - Criminal Procedure Act 2009, s 326C(3)(b)(iii)(A) - Whether fresh evidence can be 'highly probative in the context of the issues in dispute at the trial of the offence' where no trial following plea of guilty - Statutory context points to wider meaning - Context of issues in dispute at prospective trial includes plea - Issues in dispute extend to question whether integrity of plea impugned - Van Beelen v The Queen (2017) 262 CLR 565; Roberts v The Queen (2020) 60 VR 431; Karam v The King [2023] VSCA 318, applied - Leave to appeal granted.
CRIMINAL LAW - Appeal - Jurisdiction - Crown appeal from reference determination under Criminal Procedure Act 2009, s 319A(5) - Where Crown respondent to substantive appeal - No express conferral of right of appeal on Crown - Parties not joining issue on question whether Crown has right of appeal - Director of Public Prosecutions v State of Victoria [2025] VSCA 41, referred to - Crown may be applicant or respondent to appeal against reference determination - Court sufficiently satisfied of jurisdiction to hear and determine respondent's application for leave to appeal.
CRIMINAL LAW - Appeal - Reference determination - Judge found former Director of Public Prosecutions breached prosecutorial duty of disclosure on 4 September 2012 - Director informed of possibility of barrister's informing against applicant on 1 June 2012 - Before reference judge applicant argued breach from 1 June 2012 encompassing duty to make further inquiries - Edwards v The Queen (2021) 273 CLR 585; Eastman v Director of Public Prosecutions (ACT) [No 13] [2016] ACTCA 65; Marwan v Director of Public Prosecutions (NSW) (2019) 278 A Crim R 592, referred to - Whether judge erred by not finding breach of duty on 1 June 2012 - Alleged breach not put to Director in cross-examination - Substantial departure from rule in Browne v Dunn - Failure to put allegation to Director meant judge could not reach informed conclusion - Leave to appeal refused.
CRIMINAL LAW - Appeal - Reference determination - Judge found respondent had conceded reasonable grounds existed for applicant to have made stay application in respect of prosecutions - Submissions before judge showing no express or implied concession - Leave to appeal granted - Appeal allowed.
CRIMINAL LAW - Appeal - Reference determination - Question before judge required consideration of strength of prosecutions - Two prosecutions advanced on joint presentment/indictment - Whether judge erred by failing to consider strength of prosecutions separately - Parties agreeing Court of Appeal should assess strength of each prosecution for itself - Proposed ground of appeal having no utility - Leave to appeal refused.
CRIMINAL LAW - Appeal - Reference determination - Judge found joint criminal enterprise between barrister and four police officers to attempt to pervert course of justice - Judge 'supplemented' evidence relied on in support of applicant's case - Whether judge made finding in breach of rules of procedural fairness - Respondent on notice that applicant sought findings of unlawful or improper conduct of parties to enterprise - Cross-examination traversed matters relied on by judge - No breach of rule in Browne v Dunn - R v Morrow (2009) 26 VR 526, referred to - Requirements of procedural fairness met where underlying facts put to witnesses and parties had opportunity to address relevant evidence in course of submitting how reference questions to be answered - No error in judge's approach - Leave to appeal granted - Appeal dismissed.
CRIMINAL LAW - Appeal - Conviction - Rape and associated offences - Distress - Relevance - Whether complainant's distress capable of providing indirect support for charges.
CRIMINAL LAW - Appeal - Conviction - Rape and associated offences - Distress - Relevance - Whether complainant's distress capable of providing indirect support for charges.
CRIMINAL LAW - Appeal - Conviction - Rape and associated offences - Unreliable evidence - Whether items found at alleged offences capable of being supporting evidence - Items not so capable.
CRIMINAL LAW - Appeal - Conviction - Rape and associated offences - Whether verdicts unreasonable or cannot be supported having regard to the evidence - Lies by complainant - Complainant's credibility and reliability affected by hallucinations and delusions caused by drug use - Complainant criminally complicit with applicant in other offending - Discrepancies and inconsistencies in complainant's evidence - Not open to jury to be satisfied beyond reasonable doubt of guilt - Appeal allowed - Convictions set aside - Judgments and verdicts of acquittal entered.
PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE - Return of ex parte freezing order against a prospective judgment debtor in a proceeding in a foreign court - Where plaintiffs acknowledged that there was material non-disclosure at ex parte hearing - Where plaintiffs amended their case in the proceeding in the foreign court and sought to have the ex parte freezing order continued or a fresh freezing order made on similar terms - Where plaintiffs established a good arguable case with sufficient prospect of a favourable judgment in the foreign court - Where plaintiffs failed to demonstrate a danger or risk that the defendant will dissipate his assets - Ex parte freezing order discharged - Application for fresh freezing order not granted - Foreign Judgments Act 1991 (Cth) - Foreign Judgments Regulations 1992 (Cth) - Supreme Court General Civil Procedure Rules (2025) (Vic) Order 37A - Inherent jurisdiction of the Court.
PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE - Return of ex parte freezing order against a prospective judgment debtor in a proceeding in a foreign court - Where plaintiffs acknowledged that there was material non-disclosure at ex parte hearing - Where plaintiffs amended their case in the proceeding in the foreign court and sought to have the ex parte freezing order continued or a fresh freezing order made on similar terms - Where plaintiffs established a good arguable case with sufficient prospect of a favourable judgment in the foreign court - Where plaintiffs failed to demonstrate a danger or risk that the defendant will dissipate his assets - Ex parte freezing order discharged - Application for fresh freezing order not granted - Foreign Judgments Act 1991 (Cth) - Foreign Judgments Regulations 1992 (Cth) - Supreme Court General Civil Procedure Rules (2025) (Vic) Order 37A - Inherent jurisdiction of the Court.
APPEAL - Supreme Court (General Civil Procedure) Rules 2025 (Vic) r 84.05 - Application to set aside winding up order - Where the company did not receive statutory demand or originating process at the time it was served - Where the company has now paid its outstanding debt to the Commissioner - Appeal allowed - Winding up order set aside.
APPEAL - Supreme Court (General Civil Procedure) Rules 2025 (Vic) r 84.05 - Application to set aside winding up order - Where the company did not receive statutory demand or originating process at the time it was served - Where the company has now paid its outstanding debt to the Commissioner - Appeal allowed - Winding up order set aside.
EQUITY - Developers purchased property via special purpose vehicle ('SPV') - Building and development business - Pre-existing lease between former owner and telecommunications group relating to roof equipment ('1996 Lease') - 1996 Lease commercially lucrative - Plan of Subdivision prepared to sell lots - Roof identified as common property vested in body corporate under strata law - Developer entered into long-term lease with body corporate over common property ('2000 Lease') to retain benefit of subsisting lease - 2000 Lease executed following AGM of body corporate - Resolutions passed - Deregistration of SPV on project completion - Rights assigned to plaintiff - Dispute between succeeding body corporate and plaintiff over enforceability of 2000 Lease - Whether 2000 Lease invalid - Whether defective authorisation - Whether fraud on the power occurred where SPV sole owner of lots and single voter at AGM - Whether developer breached fiduciary duties - Entitlement of Owners Corporation ('OC') to recover (rent) moneys accrued by plaintiff - OC bound by 2000 Lease - Declaration in favour of plaintiff - Counterclaim dismissed - Subdivision Act 1988 (Vic) ss 3(1), 5 & 5(3)(e), 24(1) & (3), 27(2), 28(1)(b) & (c), 31A(1)(c) - Subdivision (Body Corporate) Regulations 1989 (Vic) Regs 401(m), 402, 609(1) & (2) - Owners Corporation Act 2006 (Vic) ss 10(1) & (2), 20(1) - Sale of land Act 1962 (Vic) ss 32K(2), (3), (4)(a) & (b).
EQUITY - Developers purchased property via special purpose vehicle ('SPV') - Building and development business - Pre-existing lease between former owner and telecommunications group relating to roof equipment ('1996 Lease') - 1996 Lease commercially lucrative - Plan of Subdivision prepared to sell lots - Roof identified as common property vested in body corporate under strata law - Developer entered into long-term lease with body corporate over common property ('2000 Lease') to retain benefit of subsisting lease - 2000 Lease executed following AGM of body corporate - Resolutions passed - Deregistration of SPV on project completion - Rights assigned to plaintiff - Dispute between succeeding body corporate and plaintiff over enforceability of 2000 Lease - Whether 2000 Lease invalid - Whether defective authorisation - Whether fraud on the power occurred where SPV sole owner of lots and single voter at AGM - Whether developer breached fiduciary duties - Entitlement of Owners Corporation ('OC') to recover (rent) moneys accrued by plaintiff - OC bound by 2000 Lease - Declaration in favour of plaintiff - Counterclaim dismissed - Subdivision Act 1988 (Vic) ss 3(1), 5 & 5(3)(e), 24(1) & (3), 27(2), 28(1)(b) & (c), 31A(1)(c) - Subdivision (Body Corporate) Regulations 1989 (Vic) Regs 401(m), 402, 609(1) & (2) - Owners Corporation Act 2006 (Vic) ss 10(1) & (2), 20(1) - Sale of land Act 1962 (Vic) ss 32K(2), (3), (4)(a) & (b).
LEASES AND TENANCIES - Validity - Whether 2000 Lease void where possessory interest already vested in lessee under 1996 Lease - Overlapping demise under both leases - Whether 2000 Lease operated concurrently during period of overlapping demise - Application of orthodox principles - Leasehold grant preserved rights of telecommunications group - Assignment of reversionary rights - Concurrent lease doctrine upheld - Special resolution valid to authorise grant of 2000 Lease - Defective execution due to lack of clear delegation to body corporate manager - Non-compliance with regulations - Eureka Operations Pty Ltd v Viva Energy Australia Ltd [2015] VSC 648.
EQUITY - Equitable relief - Whether recourse to part performance or estoppel available where 2000 Lease improperly executed - Clear acts of reliance by plaintiff on assumption of valid execution - Waltons Stores estoppel elements satisfied - Plaintiff relied on holding leasehold interest and associated subleasing rights - Undue detriment arises if OC not bound - Breach of fiduciary duty not made out where 2000 Lease disclosed to future lot owners in contracts of sale - Purchasers' consent obtained - Voting entitlements validly exercised by developer - No fraud on the power - No dishonest scheme - OC's own failure to locate files despite awareness of 2000 Lease - Equitable doctrines invoked to support plaintiff's claim - Further statutory limitation periods and laches considered barring OC's counterclaim - Community Association DP No 270180 v Arrow Asset Management Pty Ltd [2007] NSWSC 527 - Houghton & Anor v Immer (No 155) Pty Ltd & Anor (1997) 44 NSWLR 46 - CSR Limited v Amaca Pty Ltd [2016] VSCA 320.
COSTS - Application for the award of costs on discontinuance - Whether the Court should award costs or otherwise order - Relevant principles - Supreme Court Act 1986 (Vic) s 24(1) - Northern Territory v Sangare [2019] 265 CLR 164; Soteriadis v Nillumbik Shire Council [2015] VSC 363; Merkon Constructions Pty Ltd v Residence Company Pty Ltd [2024] VSC 402, applied.
COSTS - Application for the award of costs on discontinuance - Whether the Court should award costs or otherwise order - Relevant principles - Supreme Court Act 1986 (Vic) s 24(1) - Northern Territory v Sangare [2019] 265 CLR 164; Soteriadis v Nillumbik Shire Council [2015] VSC 363; Merkon Constructions Pty Ltd v Residence Company Pty Ltd [2024] VSC 402, applied.
CORPORATIONS - Application for winding up in insolvency - Whether plaintiff had established presumptions of insolvency under s 459C(2)(b) of the Corporations Act 2001 (Cth) arising from alleged wholly unsatisfied warrant of seizure and sale and partly unsatisfied garnishee order - Finding that warrant not returned unsatisfied - Finding that garnishee order was returned partly unsatisfied - Exercise of discretion under s 467(1)(a) of the Corporations Act 2001 (Cth) to dismiss the application despite ground having been proved.
CORPORATIONS - Application for winding up in insolvency - Whether plaintiff had established presumptions of insolvency under s 459C(2)(b) of the Corporations Act 2001 (Cth) arising from alleged wholly unsatisfied warrant of seizure and sale and partly unsatisfied garnishee order - Finding that warrant not returned unsatisfied - Finding that garnishee order was returned partly unsatisfied - Exercise of discretion under s 467(1)(a) of the Corporations Act 2001 (Cth) to dismiss the application despite ground having been proved.
CORPORATIONS - External administration - Application by liquidators of responsible entity of managed investment scheme for remuneration - Further application - Remuneration approved.
CORPORATIONS - External administration - Application by liquidators of responsible entity of managed investment scheme for remuneration - Further application - Remuneration approved.
CORPORATIONS - Winding up - Statutory demand based on default judgment - Default judgment was set aside - Application to wind up the defendant in insolvency - The defendant seeks leave under s 459S of the Corporations Act 2001 (Cth) to oppose the application to wind up the company - In exercising the Court's discretion under s 467(1) the application is adjourned for 14 days for the debt to the paid to the Court - Winding up will be ordered if the defendant does not pay the debt to the Court in 14 days - Ace Contractors and Staff Pty Ltd v Westgarth Development Pty Ltd [1999] FCA 728, Chief Commissioner of Stamp Duties v Paliflex Pty Ltd (1999) 47 NSWLR 382, [1999] NSWSC 15; Re Brooklyn Park & Co Pty Ltd [2024] VSC 611 applied.
CORPORATIONS - Winding up - Statutory demand based on default judgment - Default judgment was set aside - Application to wind up the defendant in insolvency - The defendant seeks leave under s 459S of the Corporations Act 2001 (Cth) to oppose the application to wind up the company - In exercising the Court's discretion under s 467(1) the application is adjourned for 14 days for the debt to the paid to the Court - Winding up will be ordered if the defendant does not pay the debt to the Court in 14 days - Ace Contractors and Staff Pty Ltd v Westgarth Development Pty Ltd [1999] FCA 728, Chief Commissioner of Stamp Duties v Paliflex Pty Ltd (1999) 47 NSWLR 382, [1999] NSWSC 15; Re Brooklyn Park & Co Pty Ltd [2024] VSC 611 applied.
Appeal from Commissioner's determination disallowing appellant's objection against an assessment for landholder duty under Part 2 of Chapter 3 of Duties Act 2000 - Where appeal dismissed - Where parties are not agreed as to final orders including as to costs - Where the Commissioner, by leave, advanced new or re-vamped basis to support the assessment on appeal - Where the Commissioner acknowledged that there were 'inaccuracies' in the assessment as made but on appeal was seeking to recover duty in the same amount but on the re-vamped basis contended for (i.e. reflecting 'what the Commissioner in effect did') - Where Court has determined it is appropriate to remit the assessment to the Commissioner to give effect to the Court's reasons - Where appellant has been put to significant trouble and expense as a result of the Commissioner's late change of position on appeal - Appellant ordered to pay 75% of the Commissioner's costs on the standard basis - Final orders made - Taxation Administration Act 1997 (Vic) ss 109, 112, 114; Supreme Court Act 1986 (Vic) s 24; Civil Procedure Act 2010 (Vic) s 65C.
Appeal from Commissioner's determination disallowing appellant's objection against an assessment for landholder duty under Part 2 of Chapter 3 of Duties Act 2000 - Where appeal dismissed - Where parties are not agreed as to final orders including as to costs - Where the Commissioner, by leave, advanced new or re-vamped basis to support the assessment on appeal - Where the Commissioner acknowledged that there were 'inaccuracies' in the assessment as made but on appeal was seeking to recover duty in the same amount but on the re-vamped basis contended for (i.e. reflecting 'what the Commissioner in effect did') - Where Court has determined it is appropriate to remit the assessment to the Commissioner to give effect to the Court's reasons - Where appellant has been put to significant trouble and expense as a result of the Commissioner's late change of position on appeal - Appellant ordered to pay 75% of the Commissioner's costs on the standard basis - Final orders made - Taxation Administration Act 1997 (Vic) ss 109, 112, 114; Supreme Court Act 1986 (Vic) s 24; Civil Procedure Act 2010 (Vic) s 65C.
INTERLOCUTORY INJUNCTION - Urgent ex parte application - Where in advance of his departure, former employee of a security services business has downloaded information including client data - Where former employee has recently established a rival security services business and has been contacting plaintiff's clients seeking their business - Where injunction sought to prevent continuing misuse of confidential information including client data - Prima facie case and serious question to be tried - Consideration as to whether a plaintiff claiming misuse of confidential information must demonstrate damages would not be an adequate remedy - Whether balance of convenience favours granting of an injunction - Where lower risk of injustice if interim relief sought is granted - Usual undertakings as to damages given by the plaintiff - Supreme Court Act 1986 (Vic) s 37 - Court satisfied that it is just and convenient to grant the injunctive relief sought on an interim basis.
INTERLOCUTORY INJUNCTION - Urgent ex parte application - Where in advance of his departure, former employee of a security services business has downloaded information including client data - Where former employee has recently established a rival security services business and has been contacting plaintiff's clients seeking their business - Where injunction sought to prevent continuing misuse of confidential information including client data - Prima facie case and serious question to be tried - Consideration as to whether a plaintiff claiming misuse of confidential information must demonstrate damages would not be an adequate remedy - Whether balance of convenience favours granting of an injunction - Where lower risk of injustice if interim relief sought is granted - Usual undertakings as to damages given by the plaintiff - Supreme Court Act 1986 (Vic) s 37 - Court satisfied that it is just and convenient to grant the injunctive relief sought on an interim basis.
PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE - Costs - Executor's application for costs from the estate of the deceased in circumstances where the application for executor's commission under s 65 of the Administration and Probate Act 1958 (Vic) was refused - Rule 10.10 of the Supreme Court (Administration and Probate) Rules 2023 (Vic) - Rules 63.01 and 63.26 of the Supreme Court (General Civil Procedure) Rules 2015 (Vic) - Application refused - Second plaintiff to bear own cost and to pay costs of the first plaintiff's costs of the second plaintiff's application for executor's commission on a standard basis without indemnity from the deceased's estate.
PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE - Costs - Executor's application for costs from the estate of the deceased in circumstances where the application for executor's commission under s 65 of the Administration and Probate Act 1958 (Vic) was refused - Rule 10.10 of the Supreme Court (Administration and Probate) Rules 2023 (Vic) - Rules 63.01 and 63.26 of the Supreme Court (General Civil Procedure) Rules 2015 (Vic) - Application refused - Second plaintiff to bear own cost and to pay costs of the first plaintiff's costs of the second plaintiff's application for executor's commission on a standard basis without indemnity from the deceased's estate.
COSTS - Appeal proceeding dismissed by consent - Section 148 appeal from VCAT - Whether indemnity costs appropriate in the circumstances - Exercise of the Court's discretion - Costs awarded on a standard basis - Supreme Court Act 1986 (Vic) s 24 - Rokon Holding Pty Ltd v River St Property Nominees Pty Ltd (No 2) [2025] VSC 252, considered.
COSTS - Appeal proceeding dismissed by consent - Section 148 appeal from VCAT - Whether indemnity costs appropriate in the circumstances - Exercise of the Court's discretion - Costs awarded on a standard basis - Supreme Court Act 1986 (Vic) s 24 - Rokon Holding Pty Ltd v River St Property Nominees Pty Ltd (No 2) [2025] VSC 252, considered.
JUDICIAL REVIEW AND APPEALS LIST - Adjournment of hearing because of medical condition - Whether applicant provided with an opportunity to address the Tribunal on its consideration of using powers under s 78 to find that the applicant 'caused the adjournment' and that her conduct in doing so unnecessarily disadvantaged the defendants - Whether the applicant afforded natural justice to respond to costs orders and to order striking out claim if order for payment of costs not complied with - Sections 78 and 109 of Victorian Civil and Tribunal Act 1998 (Vic) - Bell Corp Victoria v Stephenson [2003] VSC 255.
JUDICIAL REVIEW AND APPEALS LIST - Adjournment of hearing because of medical condition - Whether applicant provided with an opportunity to address the Tribunal on its consideration of using powers under s 78 to find that the applicant 'caused the adjournment' and that her conduct in doing so unnecessarily disadvantaged the defendants - Whether the applicant afforded natural justice to respond to costs orders and to order striking out claim if order for payment of costs not complied with - Sections 78 and 109 of Victorian Civil and Tribunal Act 1998 (Vic) - Bell Corp Victoria v Stephenson [2003] VSC 255.
CONFISCATION AND PROCEEDS OF CRIME
CONFISCATION AND PROCEEDS OF CRIME
ADMINISTRATIVE LAW - Judicial review - Magistrates' Court decision not to set aside and instead to vary a proceeding suppression order - Plaintiffs claiming certiorari to quash suppression order - Suppression order made in circumstances where a retrial had not yet been ordered - On its face scope of order was broader than scope of empowering provision- Parties given opportunities to make submissions whether suppression order should be quashed as being broader than scope of empowering provision - Open Courts Act 2013 ss 13, 15, 17, 18, 26.
ADMINISTRATIVE LAW - Judicial review - Magistrates' Court decision not to set aside and instead to vary a proceeding suppression order - Plaintiffs claiming certiorari to quash suppression order - Suppression order made in circumstances where a retrial had not yet been ordered - On its face scope of order was broader than scope of empowering provision- Parties given opportunities to make submissions whether suppression order should be quashed as being broader than scope of empowering provision - Open Courts Act 2013 ss 13, 15, 17, 18, 26.
PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE - Suppression order - Application by plaintiff to 're-enliven' previously abandoned ground - Defendant submitted that it was unfair to allow plaintiffs to recast case - Defendant submitted that Court should not quash order on its own motion - Alternatively, defendant sought opportunity to apply for fresh proceeding suppression order in current proceeding - Abandoned ground only indirectly raised relevant jurisdictional error and application for leave was not clearly explained - Court declined application by plaintiff to 're-enliven' abandoned ground - Court decided to exercise inherent supervisory jurisdiction on its own motion and to quash suppression order - Stay granted to allow defendant to apply for fresh suppression order.
ADMINISTRATIVE LAW - Judicial Review - Medical Panel convened under the Wrongs Act 1958 (Vic) ('Wrongs Act') - Asserted failure to take into account mandatory relevant considerations - Mandatory relevant consideration to be expressed at high level of generality - Materiality - Asserted error of fact said to amount to jurisdictional error - Obligation to consider and properly apply s28LL(3) of the Wrongs Act.
ADMINISTRATIVE LAW - Judicial Review - Medical Panel convened under the Wrongs Act 1958 (Vic) ('Wrongs Act') - Asserted failure to take into account mandatory relevant considerations - Mandatory relevant consideration to be expressed at high level of generality - Materiality - Asserted error of fact said to amount to jurisdictional error - Obligation to consider and properly apply s28LL(3) of the Wrongs Act.
SPECIFIC PERFORMANCE - Building contract - Delay in completing the rectification work under the contract - Whether specific performance is an adequate remedy - Mayor, Aldermen and Burgesses of Wolverhampton v Emmons [1901] 1 QB 515 applied - Whether the scope of work is clearly defined - Whether damages are a more adequate remedy.
SPECIFIC PERFORMANCE - Building contract - Delay in completing the rectification work under the contract - Whether specific performance is an adequate remedy - Mayor, Aldermen and Burgesses of Wolverhampton v Emmons [1901] 1 QB 515 applied - Whether the scope of work is clearly defined - Whether damages are a more adequate remedy.
PROBATE - Application for revocation of grant of letters of administration of intestacy - Where copy of original will found - Presumption of destruction by the deceased animo revocandi must be overcome - Presumption not rebutted - Application dismissed - Re Ionnidis: Gebert v Sarvos, [2025] VSC 418, [72]-[82] applied.
PROBATE - Application for revocation of grant of letters of administration of intestacy - Where copy of original will found - Presumption of destruction by the deceased animo revocandi must be overcome - Presumption not rebutted - Application dismissed - Re Ionnidis: Gebert v Sarvos, [2025] VSC 418, [72]-[82] applied.
COSTS - Whether s 24(1) of the Supreme Court Act 1986 ('SCA') confers a statutory power to award costs against the Chief Commissioner of Police ('CCP') in relation to an unsuccessful public interest immunity ('PII') claim by the CCP - Whether a PII claim in the context of a prosecution brought by the Director of Public Prosecutions is a criminal proceeding for the purpose of s 24 (2) of the SCA - Whether the practice of costs not being awarded in criminal proceedings applies to a PII claim - Chief Commissioner of Police v Crupi (2024) 98 ALJR 1131 - R v Crupi (Ruling No 4) [2022] VSC 676 (Redacted) - R v Payara (2012) 36 VR 326 - Perkins v County Court of Victoria (2000) 2 VR 246 - R v Wright, Danci and Currie (1992) 77 A Crim R 67 - Criminal Procedure Act 2009 ss 302, 304 - Evidence Act 2008, ss 130, 131A - Supreme Court Act 1986, s 24.
COSTS - Whether s 24(1) of the Supreme Court Act 1986 ('SCA') confers a statutory power to award costs against the Chief Commissioner of Police ('CCP') in relation to an unsuccessful public interest immunity ('PII') claim by the CCP - Whether a PII claim in the context of a prosecution brought by the Director of Public Prosecutions is a criminal proceeding for the purpose of s 24 (2) of the SCA - Whether the practice of costs not being awarded in criminal proceedings applies to a PII claim - Chief Commissioner of Police v Crupi (2024) 98 ALJR 1131 - R v Crupi (Ruling No 4) [2022] VSC 676 (Redacted) - R v Payara (2012) 36 VR 326 - Perkins v County Court of Victoria (2000) 2 VR 246 - R v Wright, Danci and Currie (1992) 77 A Crim R 67 - Criminal Procedure Act 2009 ss 302, 304 - Evidence Act 2008, ss 130, 131A - Supreme Court Act 1986, s 24.
CRIMINAL LAW - Bail - Whether exceptional circumstances exist justifying grant of bail - Charges include trafficking a large commercial quantity of methylamphetamine and trafficking a commercial quantity of cocaine - Where at time of alleged offences applicant on parole - Where offences for which parole was granted included trafficking in a large commercial quantity of MDMA and 3 counts of trafficking in a commercial quantity of various drugs of dependence - Where parole was revoked - Where circumstantial prosecution case on major charges has reasonable prospects of success - Where sentence on major charges if convicted will exceed time on remand - Where applicant has history of illicit drug use - Where residential drug program available - Exceptional circumstances not established - Unacceptable risk - Bail refused - Bail Act 1977 (Vic) ss, 3AAA, 4AA, 4A, 4D, 4E, Item 6 of Schedule 1.
CRIMINAL LAW - Bail - Whether exceptional circumstances exist justifying grant of bail - Charges include trafficking a large commercial quantity of methylamphetamine and trafficking a commercial quantity of cocaine - Where at time of alleged offences applicant on parole - Where offences for which parole was granted included trafficking in a large commercial quantity of MDMA and 3 counts of trafficking in a commercial quantity of various drugs of dependence - Where parole was revoked - Where circumstantial prosecution case on major charges has reasonable prospects of success - Where sentence on major charges if convicted will exceed time on remand - Where applicant has history of illicit drug use - Where residential drug program available - Exceptional circumstances not established - Unacceptable risk - Bail refused - Bail Act 1977 (Vic) ss, 3AAA, 4AA, 4A, 4D, 4E, Item 6 of Schedule 1.
CRIMINAL LAW - Bail - Charges of using a carriage service to publish violent extremist material, possessing and controlling such material, threatening to use force and violence against a group distinguished by religion and using a carriage service to make a threat to kill - Child applicant - Applicant assessed as unsuitable by Youth Justice for bail service - Failure to abide by bail conditions on previous grants of bail - Longstanding fixation with terrorist organisation and ideology - Acquisition of weapons that are unaccounted for - Whether exceptional circumstances made out - Whether unacceptable risk of endangering the safety or welfare of any person, or committing an offence while on bail - Exceptional circumstances made out - Unacceptable risk - Bail refused - Crimes Act 1914 (Cth) s 15AA; Bail Act 1977 (Vic) ss 1B, 3AAA, 3B and 4E.
CRIMINAL LAW - Bail - Charges of using a carriage service to publish violent extremist material, possessing and controlling such material, threatening to use force and violence against a group distinguished by religion and using a carriage service to make a threat to kill - Child applicant - Applicant assessed as unsuitable by Youth Justice for bail service - Failure to abide by bail conditions on previous grants of bail - Longstanding fixation with terrorist organisation and ideology - Acquisition of weapons that are unaccounted for - Whether exceptional circumstances made out - Whether unacceptable risk of endangering the safety or welfare of any person, or committing an offence while on bail - Exceptional circumstances made out - Unacceptable risk - Bail refused - Crimes Act 1914 (Cth) s 15AA; Bail Act 1977 (Vic) ss 1B, 3AAA, 3B and 4E.
CRIMINAL LAW - Application for bail - Charge of murder - Where the applicant is charged with dealing fatal blow in assault of worker - Whether exceptional circumstances exist that justify grant of bail - Where applicant has no prior criminal history - Where delay is not inordinate - Where triable issues but Crown case not weak - Where applicant submission of disproportionate financial hardship to family not supported by evidence - Where substantial surety offered - Exceptional circumstances not found - Where unacceptable risk applicant would interfere with witnesses - Bail Act 1977 (Vic) ss 4A(1), 4E.
CRIMINAL LAW - Application for bail - Charge of murder - Where the applicant is charged with dealing fatal blow in assault of worker - Whether exceptional circumstances exist that justify grant of bail - Where applicant has no prior criminal history - Where delay is not inordinate - Where triable issues but Crown case not weak - Where applicant submission of disproportionate financial hardship to family not supported by evidence - Where substantial surety offered - Exceptional circumstances not found - Where unacceptable risk applicant would interfere with witnesses - Bail Act 1977 (Vic) ss 4A(1), 4E.
CRIMINAL LAW - Application for bail - Applicant charged with offences including aggravated burglary and theft whilst on bail - Where applicant has history of aggravated burglary, theft and failure to answer bail offences - Whether exceptional circumstances exist that justify grant of bail - Where applicant is vulnerable and pregnant Aboriginal woman - Exceptional circumstances exist - Whether unacceptable risk that if granted bail may commit Schedule 1 or Schedule 2 offences or endanger safety or welfare of other persons - Where aggravated burglary does not involve allegations of violence - Where no history of physical violence - Where thefts may endanger safety and welfare of other persons notwithstanding lack of physical violence - Where triable issues - Where applicant has access to stable accommodation - Where applicant has access to culturally-appropriate prenatal treatment and drug and alcohol counselling - Where Court Integrated Services Program recommends the applicant for case management - Risk is acceptable with imposition of bail conditions - Bail Act 1977 (Vic) ss 3AAA, 4AA, 4A.
CRIMINAL LAW - Application for bail - Applicant charged with offences including aggravated burglary and theft whilst on bail - Where applicant has history of aggravated burglary, theft and failure to answer bail offences - Whether exceptional circumstances exist that justify grant of bail - Where applicant is vulnerable and pregnant Aboriginal woman - Exceptional circumstances exist - Whether unacceptable risk that if granted bail may commit Schedule 1 or Schedule 2 offences or endanger safety or welfare of other persons - Where aggravated burglary does not involve allegations of violence - Where no history of physical violence - Where thefts may endanger safety and welfare of other persons notwithstanding lack of physical violence - Where triable issues - Where applicant has access to stable accommodation - Where applicant has access to culturally-appropriate prenatal treatment and drug and alcohol counselling - Where Court Integrated Services Program recommends the applicant for case management - Risk is acceptable with imposition of bail conditions - Bail Act 1977 (Vic) ss 3AAA, 4AA, 4A.
CRIMINAL LAW - Bail - Applicant charged with trafficking in drug of dependence and other charges - Applicant accused of a Schedule 2 offence while subject to a summons to answer to a charge of another Schedule 2 offence - Requirement to show exceptional circumstances - Whether exceptional circumstances made out - Whether applicant an unacceptable risk - Bail granted - Bail Act 1977, ss 1B, 3AAA, 4AA, 4A, 4D and 4E.
CRIMINAL LAW - Bail - Applicant charged with trafficking in drug of dependence and other charges - Applicant accused of a Schedule 2 offence while subject to a summons to answer to a charge of another Schedule 2 offence - Requirement to show exceptional circumstances - Whether exceptional circumstances made out - Whether applicant an unacceptable risk - Bail granted - Bail Act 1977, ss 1B, 3AAA, 4AA, 4A, 4D and 4E.
CRIMINAL LAW - Offences - Armed robbery, burglary, criminal damage, robbery (x2), theft of motor vehicle, unlicensed driving - President of Children's Court sentenced offender to total effective sentence of 10 months' detention in a Youth Justice Centre - Offender's late Notice of Appeal against sentence deemed to be application for leave to appeal against sentence - No merit in appeal - Application for leave to appeal refused - Children, Youth and Families Act 2005, ss 362, 424, 430.
CRIMINAL LAW - Offences - Armed robbery, burglary, criminal damage, robbery (x2), theft of motor vehicle, unlicensed driving - President of Children's Court sentenced offender to total effective sentence of 10 months' detention in a Youth Justice Centre - Offender's late Notice of Appeal against sentence deemed to be application for leave to appeal against sentence - No merit in appeal - Application for leave to appeal refused - Children, Youth and Families Act 2005, ss 362, 424, 430.
CRIMINAL LAW - Sentence - Causing serious injury intentionally in circumstances of gross violence - Plea of guilty - Petrol thrown on the head and upper body of victim, who was then set alight with a jet lighter - Full thickness burns to head, neck, chest, and arms and to 30% of total body surface area - Claim of having acted out of fear rejected - Relevance of Bugmy and Verdins principles - Childhood disadvantage - Some reduction in moral culpability on account of general Bugmy principle, but moral culpability still high - Limb 5 of Verdins enlivened, to modest effect - Head sentence of 13 years' imprisonment, with non-parole period of 9 years.
CRIMINAL LAW - Sentence - Causing serious injury intentionally in circumstances of gross violence - Plea of guilty - Petrol thrown on the head and upper body of victim, who was then set alight with a jet lighter - Full thickness burns to head, neck, chest, and arms and to 30% of total body surface area - Claim of having acted out of fear rejected - Relevance of Bugmy and Verdins principles - Childhood disadvantage - Some reduction in moral culpability on account of general Bugmy principle, but moral culpability still high - Limb 5 of Verdins enlivened, to modest effect - Head sentence of 13 years' imprisonment, with non-parole period of 9 years.
CRIMINAL LAW - Murder - Accused stabbed a man outside house as victim was leaving property - Defence of mental impairment - Where accused has diagnosis of schizophrenia and was experiencing psychosis with delusional belief system that victim intended to harm accused - Where two psychiatrists opined accused could not reason with a moderate degree of sense and composure about whether the conduct, as perceived by reasonable people, was wrong - Defence established - Accused declared liable to supervision - Matter adjourned so that necessary further examination, report and certificate of available services be obtained - Crimes (Mental Impairment and Unfitness to be Tried) Act 1997 (Vic) ss 20, 21, 23.
CRIMINAL LAW - Murder - Accused stabbed a man outside house as victim was leaving property - Defence of mental impairment - Where accused has diagnosis of schizophrenia and was experiencing psychosis with delusional belief system that victim intended to harm accused - Where two psychiatrists opined accused could not reason with a moderate degree of sense and composure about whether the conduct, as perceived by reasonable people, was wrong - Defence established - Accused declared liable to supervision - Matter adjourned so that necessary further examination, report and certificate of available services be obtained - Crimes (Mental Impairment and Unfitness to be Tried) Act 1997 (Vic) ss 20, 21, 23.
BIRTHS, DEATHS AND MARRIAGES REGISTRATION - Application for an approval of a proposed change of name of a child - Mother seeking change of name - Objection by the father to surname - Whether a change of name is in the best interests of the child.
BIRTHS, DEATHS AND MARRIAGES REGISTRATION - Application for an approval of a proposed change of name of a child - Mother seeking change of name - Objection by the father to surname - Whether a change of name is in the best interests of the child.