SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND

Size: px
Start display at page:

Download "SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND"

Transcription

1 SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND CITATION: R v Warradoo [2014] QCA 299 PARTIES: R v WARRADOO, Charles Christopher (appellant/applicant) FILE NO/S: CA No 274 of 2013 SC No 31 of 2013 DIVISION: PROCEEDING: ORIGINATING COURT: Court of Appeal Appeal against Conviction & Sentence Supreme Court at Cairns DELIVERED ON: 25 November 2014 DELIVERED AT: Brisbane HEARING DATE: 23 October 2014 JUDGES: ORDERS: Holmes and Fraser JJA and Philippides J Separate reasons for judgment of each member of the Court, each concurring as to the orders made 1. Dismiss the appeal against conviction. 2. Refuse the application for leave to appeal against sentence. CATCHWORDS: CRIMINAL LAW APPEAL AND NEW TRIAL OBJECTIONS OR POINTS NOT RAISED IN COURT BELOW MISDIRECTION AND NON-DIRECTION PARTICULAR CASES where the appellant was convicted by a jury of the murder of his de facto partner where the issue at trial was whether an intent to kill or do grievous bodily harm could be inferred from the circumstances surrounding the killing where hearsay evidence of conversations between the deceased and the deceased s mother and niece was admitted under s 93B of the Evidence Act 1977 (Qld) where the appellant contends that the trial judge did not give adequate warnings to the jury concerning the use and reliability of the two witnesses evidence under s 93C of the Evidence Act where the evidence was not admitted as a circumstance relevant to intent but as evidence of the nature of the relationship between the appellant and the deceased whether any miscarriage of justice has resulted from the lack of a direction under s 93C of the Evidence Act CRIMINAL LAW APPEAL AND NEW TRIAL APPEAL AGAINST SENTENCE SENTENCE: WHAT CONSTITUTES where the applicant seeks leave to appeal

2 2 COUNSEL: SOLICITORS: against his sentence of life imprisonment with parole eligibility after 20 years where the mandatory sentence of life imprisonment took into account the aggravating circumstance of the applicant s previous conviction for murder where, pursuant to s 305(2) of the Criminal Code, the sentencing judge was obliged to order that the applicant serve a minimum of 20 years imprisonment whether the application for leave to appeal against sentence should be refused Evidence Act 1977 (Qld), s 93B, s 93C, s 132B Roach v The Queen (2011) 242 CLR 610; [2011] HCA 12, followed Wilson v The Queen (1970) 123 CLR 334; [1970] HCA 17, followed D R Kent QC for the appellant/applicant (pro bono) D C Boyle for the respondent Fisher Dore Lawyers for the appellant/applicant (pro bono) Director of Public Prosecutions (Queensland) for the respondent [1] HOLMES JA: The appellant was convicted by a jury of the murder of his girlfriend, Angela Dean. He appeals that conviction on the ground that the trial judge did not give adequate warnings to the jury concerning the use and reliability of two witnesses evidence about conversations with Ms Dean, admitted under s 93B of the Evidence Act He also seeks leave to appeal against his sentence of life imprisonment with parole eligibility after 20 years. Counsel, who appeared pro bono, did not advance, but lacked instructions to abandon, that application. [2] At the commencement of the trial, the appellant pleaded guilty before the jury panel to manslaughter. The Crown did not accept the plea and the trial proceeded on the charge of murder. The only real issue was whether an intent to kill or do grievous bodily harm could be inferred from the circumstances surrounding the killing. The appellant did not give evidence. The Crown case [3] Ms Dean was 37 when she was fatally stabbed by the appellant, either on the night of Thursday, 16 August 2012 or in the early hours of the following morning. She had been living with her mother, Jean Temple, at Lockhart River. For a period of two or three months the appellant also lived in Ms Temple s house as Ms Dean s de facto husband. Acquaintances of the appellant said that in the fortnight or so before Ms Dean s death, the appellant had complained to them of Ms Dean s jealousy as a problem in their relationship. [4] The s 93B evidence which was the subject of this appeal came from Ms Temple and Ms Dean s niece, Cecily Rokeby, who also lived in Ms Temple s house. Ms Rokeby said that on an occasion about a month before her death, her aunt told her that the appellant had grabbed her by the neck during an argument and tried to choke her. Some red marks were visible on her neck. Ms Temple said that about a week before her daughter died, the couple had argued over the fact that the appellant

3 3 had the SIM card of another woman. In the week leading up to the death, there was an instance when the couple were arguing in her daughter s room; she could hear what she described as thumping on the wall. Ms Dean emerged angry and upset and said that the appellant had threatened to choke her and break her neck. [5] After that incident, Ms Temple told the appellant to leave; he collected his belongings and did so. The next day, however, he returned, and Ms Dean and he left the house together, intending to travel together to a family ceremony at Bamaga. The couple stopped at Archer River for the night, camping by the riverside. They spent an hour or so drinking at the Archer River Roadhouse, each consuming three or four beers. Two men who had also been drinking there that evening said that they saw the couple arguing; one heard Ms Dean call the appellant a mongrel. The appellant made a passing remark to the other drinkers to the effect that women were frustrating or difficult to understand. [6] The following morning, the appellant arrived at the roadhouse at about 8.15 am, saying that he was unable to wake Ms Dean. The roadhouse owners, Mr and Mrs Allen, went to the camping site where they found her lying on her back, fully clothed and covered, except for her head, with a sheet. She was dead; Mrs Allen said that there was an injury to her lip, which had not been evident the previous evening. A small knife was later found in her right hand; the inference was that the appellant had placed it there. Witnesses who spoke to him later that morning said that he was upset and crying, repeating, Please Ange, wake up. I m sorry, Ange. He maintained that he could not understand what had happened and said that Ms Dean was very jealous and suffered from depression. They had been drinking and using marijuana. [7] Ms Dean s body was the subject of a post-mortem examination. The pathologist who conducted it identified six wounds which he described as stab wounds and another seven minor lacerations which were shallow cuts, scratches or puncture points. All of the injuries were to Ms Dean s neck, other than an incision on her cheek, and all had been inflicted with a sharp object. The most serious of the injuries, and the one which had caused death, was a wound which had cut both the carotid artery and jugular vein; it was about eight centimetres deep. In addition to the wounds caused by a sharp object, there were some injuries caused by blunt force contact, consisting of two tears to the upper and lower lips respectively, some bruising over her forehead and a scratch on her left shoulder. The appellant s argument on the appeal [8] The appellant accepted that the evidence of Ms Temple and Ms Rokeby was properly admitted under s 93B of the Evidence Act. That provision renders the hearsay rule inapplicable to evidence of a representation of fact made by a person who is dead, if the representation was made shortly after the asserted fact happened and in circumstances making it unlikely to be a fabrication, or was made in circumstances making it highly probable it was reliable. [9] The appellant s complaint was, rather, that no warning under s 93C was given. That provision is as follows: 93C Warning and information for jury about hearsay evidence (1) This section applies if evidence is admitted under section 93B (hearsay evidence) and there is a jury.

4 4 (2) On request by a party, the court must, unless there are good reasons for not doing so (a) (b) (c) warn the jury the hearsay evidence may be unreliable; and inform the jury of matters that may cause the hearsay evidence to be unreliable; and warn the jury of the need for caution in deciding whether to accept the hearsay evidence and the weight to be given to it. (3) It is not necessary for a particular form of words to be used in giving the warning or information. (4) This section does not affect another power of the court to give a warning to, or to inform, the jury. [10] No such warning was sought at trial. By agreement, a letter from defence counsel was tendered in this court; he said that not asking the judge to give a warning under s 93C was an oversight and not a tactical decision. The appellant argued that it was important that a warning be given, because evidence of previous infliction of injury was relevant in establishing the appellant s intent to cause Ms Dean s death. The only other evidence of intent was the circumstance of the wounds to Ms Dean s neck. Section 93C was designed to moderate the erosion of the hearsay rule by s 93B. The warning referred to in s 93C, it was said, was explicit as to the unreliability of hearsay evidence. Discussion [11] The evidence admitted under s 93B was not in fact treated as a circumstance relevant to intent. The trial judge did not refer specifically to the evidence of Ms Temple or Ms Rokeby, but he said, more generally on the subject of the relationship between the appellant and Ms Dean, There was evidence of friction between the accused and the deceased stemming from her jealousy of him and the things he did. You would not, of course, infer from that that the accused intended to kill her or do her grievous bodily harm. That evidence went simply to the nature of the relationship between accused and the deceased, which was not plain sailing. It had limited relevance and, as I ve said, you could not rationally conclude from that that he had any reasonable motivation to kill her. It simply puts the killing into a context, and Mr Boyle addressed something from this. He talked about friction escalating that night to a crescendo which involved the stabbing death. So it establishes a context but it doesn t, of itself, obviously this is a matter of common sense doesn t, of itself, prove that this man must have murdered his de facto partner. [12] Although there was no reference at the trial to the purpose for which the s 93B evidence was admitted, that passage from the summing up makes it clear that the Crown relied on the two women s statements, not as any form of propensity evidence, but as illuminating the nature of the relationship between the appellant and Ms Dean. It was admissible as evidence of the history of the domestic relationship between the two under s 132B of the Evidence Act. It could properly be

5 5 relied on to show the kind of relationship they had and to assist in the evaluation of the other evidence in the case. 1 As can be seen, the trial judge directed the jury on that basis; he expressly limited the use to which the evidence could be put to establishing the nature of the relationship, rather than being able to be used as proof of intent. [13] As a matter of construction, I do not think that s 93C(2) is directed generally to the unreliability of hearsay evidence. Firstly, the giving of a warning is not automatic; it is required only where a party requests it. Secondly, the use of the definite article is significant: the warning is to be given in relation to the hearsay evidence ; that is to say, the hearsay evidence given in the particular case, not hearsay evidence of the kind generally. [14] In the present case, it is not evident what particular features of Ms Temple s and Ms Rokeby s evidence the trial judge could have identified as grounding a warning that it might be unreliable. The defence had not raised any issues in that regard. Neither woman was challenged about her evidence, although it might be expected the appellant would at least have been in a position to give instructions as to whether the noisy argument, which Ms Temple referred to had occurred; whether he had indeed been asked to leave her home in the circumstances she described; or whether Ms Dean s neck bore the marks which Ms Rokeby described. There was no suggestion that either witness bore any animosity to the appellant or had any reason to misrepresent what occurred, and it was not suggested that their recollection of the events might, for any reason, be inaccurate. [15] Nor was it was suggested that the source of the information, Ms Dean herself, was given to exaggeration or untruth. The complaint in each case was made immediately after the relevant incident and was supported, in the instance of which Ms Rokeby gave evidence, by the marks apparent on Ms Dean s neck, and, in respect of Ms Temple s evidence, by the noises she heard consistent with an altercation immediately before Ms Dean s disclosure. [16] Notwithstanding trial counsel's admission of oversight, the question is whether any miscarriage of justice has resulted from the absence of a warning. Apart from a bland statement that hearsay evidence could be unreliable, it is difficult to see what the trial judge could have said; and it seems unlikely that a warning in such general terms would have been helpful. And a warning would have drawn the jury s attention back to the evidence of Ms Rokeby and Ms Temple, which was unlikely to be to the appellant s advantage, while suggestions of unreliability which could not be attributed to any particular feature of the evidence were liable to underline its actual reliability. Indeed, s 93C(4) would have permitted the court to inform the jury of those matters which might be regarded as reinforcing the worth of the evidence. [17] Not only were there good reasons to think that a warning may not have benefited the appellant, but, given the absence of bases for suggesting that the hearsay evidence was or might be unreliable, and the features pointing to the contrary, it seems to me quite possible that had the trial judge been asked to give a warning, he would have concluded that there were good reasons for not doing so. [18] I do not consider that the lack of the direction under s 93C caused any miscarriage of justice. I would dismiss the appeal against conviction. 1 Roach v The Queen (2011) 242 CLR 610, 621; Wilson v The Queen (1970) 123 CLR 334, 344.

6 6 The application for leave to appeal against sentence [19] The appellant s application for leave to appeal against sentence remained on foot, although counsel did not, for obvious reasons, seek to argue it. The sentence of life imprisonment was mandatory for murder 2 and because an aggravating circumstance - the appellant s previous conviction of murder - had been alleged and proved against him, in accordance with the procedure prescribed in s 630 of the Criminal Code, the sentencing judge was obliged to order that he not be released before serving a minimum of 20 years imprisonment. 3 Any appeal against sentence being clearly doomed to failure, the application for leave to appeal must be dismissed. Orders [20] The appeal against conviction should be dismissed and the application for leave to appeal against sentence refused. [21] FRASER JA: I agree with the reasons for judgment of Holmes JA and the orders proposed by her Honour. [22] PHILIPPIDES J: I agree that the appeal against conviction should be dismissed and the application for leave to appeal against sentence should be refused for the reasons given by Holmes JA. 2 3 Criminal Code, s 305(1). Section 305 (2).

SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND

SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND CITATION: R v MCE [2015] QCA 4 PARTIES: R v MCE (appellant) FILE NO: CA No 186 of 2014 DC No 198 of 2012 DIVISION: PROCEEDING: ORIGINATING COURT: Court of Appeal Appeal against

More information

SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND

SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND CITATION: R v M [2003] QCA 380 PARTIES: R v M (applicant/appellant) FILE NO/S: CA No 92 of 2003 DC No 334 of 2003 DIVISION: PROCEEDING: ORIGINATING COURT: Court of Appeal Appeal

More information

SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND

SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND CITATION: R v Hoet [2016] QCA 230 PARTIES: R v HOET, Reece Karaitana (appellant) FILE NO/S: CA No 64 of 2016 DC No 548 of 2016 DIVISION: PROCEEDING: Court of Appeal Appeal against

More information

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF BELIZE, A.D. 2006

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF BELIZE, A.D. 2006 IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF BELIZE, A.D. 2006 CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 5 OF 2006 BETWEEN: LAURIANO RAMIREZ Appellant AND THE QUEEN Respondent BEFORE: The Hon. Mr. Justice Mottley President The Hon. Mr. Justice

More information

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF BELIZE AD 2017 CRIMINAL APPEAL NO 5 OF 2014

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF BELIZE AD 2017 CRIMINAL APPEAL NO 5 OF 2014 IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF BELIZE AD 2017 CRIMINAL APPEAL NO 5 OF 2014 MAY BUSH Appellant v THE QUEEN Respondent BEFORE The Hon Mr Justice Sir Manuel Sosa The Hon Mr Justice Samuel Awich The Hon Mr Justice

More information

SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND

SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND CITATION: R v S [2000] QCA 256 PARTIES: R v S (appellant) FILE NO/S: CA No 80 of 2000 DC No 80 of 1999 DIVISION: PROCEEDING: ORIGINATING COURT: Court of Appeal Appeal against

More information

SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND

SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND CITATION: Buchan v Nominal Defendant [2012] QCA 136 PARTIES: JOHN DAVID BUCHAN (appellant) v NOMINAL DEFENDANT (respondent) FILE NO/S: Appeal No 11763 of 2011 SC No 7075 of

More information

HIGH COURT OF AUSTRALIA

HIGH COURT OF AUSTRALIA HIGH COURT OF AUSTRALIA FRENCH C, KIEFEL, BELL, GAGELER AND KEANE DANG KHOA NGUYEN APPELLANT AND THE QUEEN RESPONDENT Nguyen v The Queen [2013] HCA 32 27 une 2013 M30/2013 ORDER 1. Appeal allowed. 2. Set

More information

DAVID STANLEY TRANTER Appellant. THE QUEEN Respondent JUDGMENT OF THE COURT. The appeal against conviction and sentence is dismissed.

DAVID STANLEY TRANTER Appellant. THE QUEEN Respondent JUDGMENT OF THE COURT. The appeal against conviction and sentence is dismissed. NOTE: PUBLICATION OF NAMES, ADDRESSES, OCCUPATIONS OR IDENTIFYING PARTICULARS, OF COMPLAINANTS PROHIBITED BY S 139 OF THE CRIMINAL JUSTICE ACT 1985 AND S 203 OF THE CRIMINAL PROCEDURE ACT 2011. IN THE

More information

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF BELIZE, A.D. 2007

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF BELIZE, A.D. 2007 IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF BELIZE, A.D. 2007 CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 15 OF 2005 BETWEEN: ASBAND ANDERSON Appellant AND THE QUEEN Respondent BEFORE: The Hon. Mr. Justice Mottley President The Hon. Mr. Justice

More information

THE SUPREME COURT OF APPEAL OF SOUTH AFRICA JUDGMENT

THE SUPREME COURT OF APPEAL OF SOUTH AFRICA JUDGMENT THE SUPREME COURT OF APPEAL OF SOUTH AFRICA JUDGMENT Case No: 300/2013 Not reportable In the matter between: LEEROY BENSON Appellant and THE STATE Respondent Neutral citation: Benson v the State (300/13)

More information

IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA (BOPHUTHATSWANA PROVINCIAL DIVISION)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA (BOPHUTHATSWANA PROVINCIAL DIVISION) IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA (BOPHUTHATSWANA PROVINCIAL DIVISION) CASE NO.: CA 85/05 In the matter between: JOEL LATHA APPELLANT AND THE STATE RESPONDENT CRIMINAL APPEAL HENDRICKS J & LANDMAN J JUDGMENT

More information

IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA (GAUTENG DIVISION, PRETORIA)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA (GAUTENG DIVISION, PRETORIA) 1 SAFLII Note: Certain personal/private details of parties or witnesses have been redacted from this document in compliance with the law and SAFLII Policy IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA (GAUTENG DIVISION,

More information

THE SUPREME COURT OF APPEAL OF SOUTH AFRICA JUDGMENT. Vincent Olebogang Magano and

THE SUPREME COURT OF APPEAL OF SOUTH AFRICA JUDGMENT. Vincent Olebogang Magano and THE SUPREME COURT OF APPEAL OF SOUTH AFRICA JUDGMENT In the matter between: Case no: 849/12 Not reportable Vincent Olebogang Magano and The State Appellant Respondent Neutral citation: Magano v S (849/12)[2013]

More information

SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND

SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND CITATION: R v Andreassen [2005] QCA 107 PARTIES: R v ANDREASSEN, Jonathon Baird (appellant) FILE NO/S: CA No 334 of 2004 SC No 29 of 2004 DIVISION: PROCEEDING: ORIGINATING COURT:

More information

THE IMMIGRATION ACTS. Before UPPER TRIBUNAL JUDGE CRAIG. Between MR ABDUL KADIR SAID. and. THE SECRETARY OF STATE FOR THE HOME DEPARTMENT Respondent

THE IMMIGRATION ACTS. Before UPPER TRIBUNAL JUDGE CRAIG. Between MR ABDUL KADIR SAID. and. THE SECRETARY OF STATE FOR THE HOME DEPARTMENT Respondent IAC-FH-NL-V1 Upper Tribunal (Immigration and Asylum Chamber) Appeal Number: DA/00950/2014 THE IMMIGRATION ACTS Heard at Royal Courts of Justice Oral determination given immediately following the hearing

More information

IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA EASTERN CAPE DIVISION, GRAHAMSTOWN. CASE NO: CA&R 361/2014 Date heard: 5 August 2015 Date delivered: 13 August 2015

IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA EASTERN CAPE DIVISION, GRAHAMSTOWN. CASE NO: CA&R 361/2014 Date heard: 5 August 2015 Date delivered: 13 August 2015 SAFLII Note: Certain personal/private details of parties or witnesses have been redacted from this document in compliance with the law and SAFLII Policy IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA EASTERN CAPE DIVISION,

More information

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL BETWEEN AND

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL BETWEEN AND TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO IN THE COURT OF APPEAL Mag. Appeal No. 13 of 2011 BETWEEN DAVENDRA OUJAR Appellant AND P.C. DANRAJ ROOPAN #15253 Respondent PANEL: P. WEEKES, J A R. NARINE, J A Appearances: Mr. Jagdeo

More information

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA CASE NO. 358/92 J VD M IN THE SUPREME COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA (APPELLATE DIVISION) In the matter between: MADODA ALFRED MCHUNU Appellant and THE STATE Respondent CORAM: BOTHA, JA et NICHOLAS, VAN COLLER,

More information

S18A1609. STANFORD v. THE STATE. evidence was presented to support a finding of guilt. For the reasons that

S18A1609. STANFORD v. THE STATE. evidence was presented to support a finding of guilt. For the reasons that In the Supreme Court of Georgia Decided: March 4, 2019 S18A1609. STANFORD v. THE STATE. BENHAM, Justice. In February 2015, Appellant Larry Stanford was convicted of two counts of malice murder in connection

More information

NOTE: PUBLICATION OF NAME OR IDENTIFYING PARTICULARS OF COMPLAINANT PROHIBITED BY S 139 OF THE CRIMINAL JUSTICE ACT 1985.

NOTE: PUBLICATION OF NAME OR IDENTIFYING PARTICULARS OF COMPLAINANT PROHIBITED BY S 139 OF THE CRIMINAL JUSTICE ACT 1985. NOTE: PUBLICATION OF NAME OR IDENTIFYING PARTICULARS OF COMPLAINANT PROHIBITED BY S 139 OF THE CRIMINAL JUSTICE ACT 1985. IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF NEW ZEALAND CA82/2014 [2014] NZCA 304 BETWEEN AND TOESE

More information

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF NEW ZEALAND CA305/2008 [2008] NZCA 415 THE QUEEN ALISTAIR MARK STUART LYON. Robertson, Cooper and Winkelmann JJ

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF NEW ZEALAND CA305/2008 [2008] NZCA 415 THE QUEEN ALISTAIR MARK STUART LYON. Robertson, Cooper and Winkelmann JJ IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF NEW ZEALAND CA305/2008 [2008] NZCA 415 THE QUEEN v ALISTAIR MARK STUART LYON Hearing: 20 August 2008 Court: Counsel: Judgment: Robertson, Cooper and Winkelmann JJ Appellant in

More information

SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND

SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND CITATION: PARTIES: HBU Properties Pty Ltd & Ors v Australia and New Zealand Banking Group Limited [2015] QCA 95 HBU PROPERTIES PTY LTD AS TRUSTEE FOR THE SHANE MUNDEY FAMILY

More information

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPEAL NO OF Murugan.Appellant(s) VERSUS

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPEAL NO OF Murugan.Appellant(s) VERSUS REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 1498 OF 2010 Murugan.Appellant(s) VERSUS State of Tamil Nadu.Respondent(s) J U D G M E N T Abhay Manohar Sapre,

More information

SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND

SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND CITATION: Dawson v Jewiss; Thompson v Jewiss [2004] QCA 374 PARTIES: STUART BEVAN DAWSON (plaintiff/respondent) v HENRY WILLIAM JEWISS also known as HARRY JEWISS (defendant/appellant)

More information

THE SUPREME COURT OF APPEAL OF SOUTH AFRICA

THE SUPREME COURT OF APPEAL OF SOUTH AFRICA THE SUPREME COURT OF APPEAL OF SOUTH AFRICA MEDIA SUMMARY OF JUDGMENT DELIVERED IN THE SUPREME COURT OF APPEAL FROM The Registrar, Supreme Court of Appeal DATE 29 September 2015 STATUS Immediate Negondeni

More information

1/?-l::11 1}~" =,-. In the matter between: IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA (GAUTENG DIVISION, PRETORIA) Case number: A736/2015.

1/?-l::11 1}~ =,-. In the matter between: IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA (GAUTENG DIVISION, PRETORIA) Case number: A736/2015. ,. IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA (GAUTENG DIVISION, PRETORIA) Case number: A736/2015 Date: 1 /;1 bt) 1 =,-. DELETE WHICHEVER IS NOT APPLICABLE (1) REPORTABLE: YES/ (2) OF INTEREST TO OTHERS JUDGES:

More information

Before: The Honourable Mr. C. M. Dennis Byron Chief Justice (Ag.) The Honourable Mr. Satrohan Singh Justice of Appeal

Before: The Honourable Mr. C. M. Dennis Byron Chief Justice (Ag.) The Honourable Mr. Satrohan Singh Justice of Appeal ANTIGUA AND BARBUDA CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 3 OF 1997 BETWEEN: IN THE COURT OF APPEAL CONFESOR VALDEZ FRANCO APPELLANT and RESPONDENT THE QUEEN Before: The Honourable Mr. C. M. Dennis Byron Chief Justice (Ag.)

More information

SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND

SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND CITATION: Reitano v Shearer & Anor [2014] QCA 336 PARTIES: MONICA-LEIGH REITANO (appellant) v BENJAMIN JOHN SHEARER (first respondent) RACQ INSURANCE LIMITED ABN 50 009 704

More information

THE SUPREME COURT OF APPEAL OF SOUTH AFRICA JUDGMENT

THE SUPREME COURT OF APPEAL OF SOUTH AFRICA JUDGMENT ` THE SUPREME COURT OF APPEAL OF SOUTH AFRICA In the matter between: JUDGMENT Not Reportable Case No: 459/15 AVHAPFANI DANIEL KHAVHADI RUDZANI ELISAH SIGOVHO MASHUDU JOYCE MUDAU FIRST APPELLANT SECOND

More information

THE SUPREME COURT OF APPEAL OF SOUTH AFRICA JUDGMENT. Neutral citation: Madiba v The State (497/2013) [2014] ZASCA 13 (20 March 2014)

THE SUPREME COURT OF APPEAL OF SOUTH AFRICA JUDGMENT. Neutral citation: Madiba v The State (497/2013) [2014] ZASCA 13 (20 March 2014) SAFLII Note: Certain personal/private details of parties or witnesses have been redacted from this document in compliance with the law and SAFLII Policy THE SUPREME COURT OF APPEAL OF SOUTH AFRICA JUDGMENT

More information

SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND

SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND CITATION: Stubberfield v Lippiatt & Anor [2007] QCA 90 PARTIES: JOHN RICHARD STUBBERFIELD (plaintiff/appellant) v FREDERICK WALTON LIPPIATT (first defendant/first respondent)

More information

SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND

SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND CITATION: R v Galigan [2017] QCA 231 PARTIES: R v GALIGAN, Robert Brian (appellant) FILE NO/S: CA No 53 of 2017 DC No 61 of 2016 DIVISION: PROCEEDING: ORIGINATING COURT: Court

More information

Appellant. THE QUEEN Respondent. N M Dutch for Appellant I R Murray and R K Thomson for Respondent JUDGMENT OF THE COURT

Appellant. THE QUEEN Respondent. N M Dutch for Appellant I R Murray and R K Thomson for Respondent JUDGMENT OF THE COURT ORDER PROHIBITING PUBLICATION OF NAME, ADDRESS, OCCUPATION OR IDENTIFYING PARTICULARS OF APPELLANT PURSUANT TO S 200 OF THE CRIMINAL PROCEDURE ACT 2011. NOTE: PUBLICATION OF NAMES, ADDRESSES, OCCUPATIONS

More information

Respondent. Counsel: Paul Heaslip for the Appellant Sarah Mandeno for the Respondent

Respondent. Counsel: Paul Heaslip for the Appellant Sarah Mandeno for the Respondent IN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND AUCKLAND REGISTRY A193/00 BETWEEN R LYON Appellant AND THE NEW ZEALAND POLICE Respondent Date of hearin g : 14 November 2000 Counsel: Paul Heaslip for the Appellant Sarah

More information

CARL KIATIKA NGAWHIKA Appellant. THE QUEEN Respondent. J U Mooney for Appellant JEL Carruthers for Respondent JUDGMENT OF THE COURT

CARL KIATIKA NGAWHIKA Appellant. THE QUEEN Respondent. J U Mooney for Appellant JEL Carruthers for Respondent JUDGMENT OF THE COURT IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF NEW ZEALAND CA297/2017 [2017] NZCA 535 BETWEEN AND CARL KIATIKA NGAWHIKA Appellant THE QUEEN Respondent Hearing: 15 November 2017 Court: Counsel: Judgment: Harrison, Lang and

More information

REPUBLIC OF NAMIBIA HIGH COURT OF NAMIBIA MAIN DIVISION, WINDHOEK APPEAL JUDGMENT

REPUBLIC OF NAMIBIA HIGH COURT OF NAMIBIA MAIN DIVISION, WINDHOEK APPEAL JUDGMENT REPUBLIC OF NAMIBIA NOT REPORTABLE HIGH COURT OF NAMIBIA MAIN DIVISION, WINDHOEK APPEAL JUDGMENT Case no: CA 123/2016 SAUL MBAISA APPELLANT versus THE STATE RESPONDENT Neutral citation: Mbaisa v S (CA

More information

JUDGMENT OF THE COURT

JUDGMENT OF THE COURT IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF TANZANIA ATTANGA {CORAM: MBAROUK, J.A., MWARIJA, J.A. And MWANGESI. J.A.) CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 391 of 2016 CHARLES JUMA............ APPELLANT VERSUS THE REPUBLIC.......................

More information

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA /MC NCAMSILTLE GANADI - and - THE STATE VIVIER AJA. Case no 29/84 /MC IN THE SUPREME COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA (APPELLATE DIVISION) In the matter between NCAMSILILE GANADI Appellant - and - THE STATE Respondent

More information

CASE NO. 1D Nancy A. Daniels, Public Defender, and Gail E. Anderson, Assistant Public Defender, Tallahassee, for Appellant.

CASE NO. 1D Nancy A. Daniels, Public Defender, and Gail E. Anderson, Assistant Public Defender, Tallahassee, for Appellant. IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL FIRST DISTRICT, STATE OF FLORIDA RICHARD SUMMERALL, v. Appellant, NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO FILE MOTION FOR REHEARING AND DISPOSITION THEREOF IF FILED CASE NO. 1D14-1256

More information

THE IMMIGRATION ACTS. Heard at Field House Decision & Reasons Promulgated On 19 October 2018 On 13 November Before

THE IMMIGRATION ACTS. Heard at Field House Decision & Reasons Promulgated On 19 October 2018 On 13 November Before Upper Tribunal (Immigration and Asylum Chamber) THE IMMIGRATION ACTS Heard at Field House Decision & Reasons Promulgated On 19 October 2018 On 13 November 2018 Before DEPUTY UPPER TRIBUNAL JUDGE ESHUN

More information

IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA (TRANSVAAL PROVINCIAL DIVISION) GIDEON SIGASA NELANI BONGANI OWEN TSHABALALA THE STATE JUDGMENT

IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA (TRANSVAAL PROVINCIAL DIVISION) GIDEON SIGASA NELANI BONGANI OWEN TSHABALALA THE STATE JUDGMENT IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA (TRANSVAAL PROVINCIAL DIVISION) NOT REPORTABLE Date: 2008 04 25 Case Number: A245/07 In the matter between: GIDEON SIGASA NELANI BONGANI OWEN TSHABALALA First Appellant

More information

SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND

SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND CITATION: R v RAX [2017] QCA 133 PARTIES: R v RAX (appellant) FILE NO/S: CA No 291 of 2016 DC No 224 of 2016 DIVISION: PROCEEDING: ORIGINATING COURT: Court of Appeal Appeal

More information

THE IMMIGRATION ACTS. Before UPPER TRIBUNAL JUDGE DEANS. Between. and THE SECRETARY OF STATE FOR THE HOME DEPARTMENT

THE IMMIGRATION ACTS. Before UPPER TRIBUNAL JUDGE DEANS. Between. and THE SECRETARY OF STATE FOR THE HOME DEPARTMENT Upper Tribunal (Immigration and Asylum Chamber) THE IMMIGRATION ACTS Heard at Field House Decision & Reasons Promulgated On 21 st April 2016 On 13 th July 2016 Before UPPER TRIBUNAL JUDGE DEANS Between

More information

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF NEW ZEALAND CA 385/97 THE QUEEN

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF NEW ZEALAND CA 385/97 THE QUEEN IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF NEW ZEALAND CA 385/97 THE QUEEN v CLIFFORD ANDREW RODGER CoramEichelbaum CJ Tipping J Goddard J Hearing 30 April 1998 Counsel H Croft for Appellant S P France for Crown Judgment

More information

IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA LIMPOPO HIGH COURT, THOHOYANDOU HELD AT THOHOYANDOU

IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA LIMPOPO HIGH COURT, THOHOYANDOU HELD AT THOHOYANDOU IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA LIMPOPO HIGH COURT, THOHOYANDOU HELD AT THOHOYANDOU In the matter between: CASE NO: A15/2012 MPHO SIPHOLI MAKHIGI RAMULONDI KHUMBUDZO First Appellant Second Appellant

More information

ASYLUM AND IMMIGRATION TRIBUNAL

ASYLUM AND IMMIGRATION TRIBUNAL RS and SS (Exclusion of appellant from hearing) Pakistan [2008] UKAIT 00012 ASYLUM AND IMMIGRATION TRIBUNAL THE IMMIGRATION ACTS Heard at: Field House Date of Hearing: 18 December 2007 Before: Mr C M G

More information

Rajen Hanumunthadu v The state and the independent commission against corruption SCJ 288 Judgment delivered on 01 September 2010 This was an

Rajen Hanumunthadu v The state and the independent commission against corruption SCJ 288 Judgment delivered on 01 September 2010 This was an Rajen Hanumunthadu v The state and the independent commission against corruption. 2010 SCJ 288 Judgment delivered on 01 September 2010 This was an appeal from the Intermediate Court where the Appellant

More information

Court of Appeals. First District of Texas

Court of Appeals. First District of Texas Opinion issued October 17, 2013 In The Court of Appeals For The First District of Texas NO. 01-12-00664-CR NO. 01-12-00665-CR JUNIOR GARVEY, Appellant V. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee On Appeal from the

More information

Alexander Blackman. In the Court Martial Appeal Court. Judgment. 21 st December 2016

Alexander Blackman. In the Court Martial Appeal Court. Judgment. 21 st December 2016 JU Alexander Blackman In the Court Martial Appeal Court Judgment 21 st December 2016 Lord Thomas of Cwmgiedd CJ and Sweeney J : 1. The court has before it this afternoon three applications. First an application

More information

IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA (NORTH WEST DIVISION, MAHIKENG)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA (NORTH WEST DIVISION, MAHIKENG) SAFLII Note: Certain personal/private details of parties or witnesses have been redacted from this document in compliance with the law and SAFLII Policy IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA (NORTH WEST DIVISION,

More information

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF BELIZE, A.D. 2008

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF BELIZE, A.D. 2008 IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF BELIZE, A.D. 2008 CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 31 OF 2005 BETWEEN: HARVEY LEE HENDERSON Appellant AND THE QUEEN Respondent BEFORE: The Hon. Mr. Justice Mottley President The Hon. Mr. Justice

More information

CASE NO: 554/90 AND A B BRICKWORKS (PTY) LTD VAN COLLER, AJA :

CASE NO: 554/90 AND A B BRICKWORKS (PTY) LTD VAN COLLER, AJA : CASE NO: 554/90 JACOBUS ALENSON APPELLANT AND A B BRICKWORKS (PTY) LTD RESPONDENT VAN COLLER, AJA : CASE NO: 554/90 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA (APPELLATE DIVISION) In the matter between: JACOBUS

More information

JAMES DAWSON MEENA Vs. REPUBLIC- Appeal from the Conviction and Sentence of the High Court of Tanzania at Moshi- Criminal Sessions Case No.

JAMES DAWSON MEENA Vs. REPUBLIC- Appeal from the Conviction and Sentence of the High Court of Tanzania at Moshi- Criminal Sessions Case No. CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 222 OF 2007- COURT OF APPEAL OF TANZANIA AT ARUSHA RAMADHANI, C.J., MROSO, J.A. And RUTAKANGWA, J.A. JAMES DAWSON MEENA Vs. REPUBLIC- Appeal from the Conviction and Sentence of the

More information

OLO and Others (para foreign criminal ) [2016] UKUT (IAC) THE IMMIGRATION ACTS

OLO and Others (para foreign criminal ) [2016] UKUT (IAC) THE IMMIGRATION ACTS Upper Tribunal (Immigration and Asylum Chamber) OLO and Others (para 398 - foreign criminal ) [2016] UKUT 00056 (IAC) THE IMMIGRATION ACTS Heard at Field House Decision & Reasons Promulgated On 23 November

More information

THE IMMIGRATION ACTS. Before UPPER TRIBUNAL JUDGE KOPIECZEK. Between. THE SECRETARY OF STATE FOR THE HOME DEPARTMENT Appellant and

THE IMMIGRATION ACTS. Before UPPER TRIBUNAL JUDGE KOPIECZEK. Between. THE SECRETARY OF STATE FOR THE HOME DEPARTMENT Appellant and Upper Tribunal (Immigration and Asylum Chamber) Appeal Number: DA/01787/2013 THE IMMIGRATION ACTS Heard at Royal Courts of Justice Determination Promulgated On 7 July 2014 On 15 th Aug 2014 Judgment given

More information

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF TANZANIA AT ARUSHA

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF TANZANIA AT ARUSHA CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 103 OF 2006- COURT OF APPEAL OF TANZANIA AT ARUSHA- RAMADHANI, C.J., MROSO, J.A. And, KAJI J.A. NYEKA KOU Vs. REPUBLIC (Appeal from the Decision of the High Court of Tanzania at Arusha)-

More information

THE IMMIGRATION ACTS. Before UPPER TRIBUNAL JUDGE CRAIG PROFESSOR N M HILL QC DEPUTY JUDGE OF THE UPPER TRIBUNAL. Between

THE IMMIGRATION ACTS. Before UPPER TRIBUNAL JUDGE CRAIG PROFESSOR N M HILL QC DEPUTY JUDGE OF THE UPPER TRIBUNAL. Between IAC-FH-NL-V1 Upper Tribunal (Immigration and Asylum Chamber) Appeal Number: DA/01503/2014 THE IMMIGRATION ACTS Heard at Field House Oral determination given following hearing on 7 July 2015 Decision &

More information

Understanding Your Safety Responsibilities

Understanding Your Safety Responsibilities Understanding Your Safety Responsibilities Cameron Dean Partner McCullough Robertson Lawyers Background The enforcement of safety and health obligations in the Queensland mining industry by way of prosecutions

More information

SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND

SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND CITATION: R v McPherson [2002] QCA 401 PARTIES: R v McPHERSON, Terri Ann (appellant) FILE NO/S: CA No 118 of 2002 DC No 39 of 2002 DIVISION: PROCEEDING: ORIGINATING COURT: Court

More information

Appellant. THE QUEEN Respondent. Winkelmann, Peters and Collins JJ JUDGMENT OF THE COURT. The appeal against conviction and sentence is dismissed.

Appellant. THE QUEEN Respondent. Winkelmann, Peters and Collins JJ JUDGMENT OF THE COURT. The appeal against conviction and sentence is dismissed. IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF NEW ZEALAND CA508/2015 [2016] NZCA 138 BETWEEN AND MRINAL SARDANA Appellant THE QUEEN Respondent Hearing: 8 March 2016 Court: Counsel: Judgment: Winkelmann, Peters and Collins

More information

IN APPEAL BY NAT GORDON FRASER. against HER MAJESTY S ADVOCATE SUMMARY

IN APPEAL BY NAT GORDON FRASER. against HER MAJESTY S ADVOCATE SUMMARY IN APPEAL BY NAT GORDON FRASER against HER MAJESTY S ADVOCATE SUMMARY 6 May 2008 Today at the Criminal Appeal Court in Edinburgh the appeal by Nat Gordon Fraser against his conviction for the murder of

More information

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL. and THE DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC PROSECUTIONS. The Hon. Mr. Justice Michael Gordon, QC The Hon. Mr. Justice Denys Barrow, SC

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL. and THE DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC PROSECUTIONS. The Hon. Mr. Justice Michael Gordon, QC The Hon. Mr. Justice Denys Barrow, SC SAINT KITTS AND NEVIS CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.1 OF 2005 IN THE COURT OF APPEAL BETWEEN: JAVA LAWRENCE and THE DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC PROSECUTIONS Appellant Respondent Before: The Hon. Mr. Justice Brian Alleyne,

More information

JOSEPH MWAMBA KALENGA. SAKALA, CJ, MUYOVWE and MUSONDA, JJS On the 6 th December, 2011 and 8 th May, 2012

JOSEPH MWAMBA KALENGA. SAKALA, CJ, MUYOVWE and MUSONDA, JJS On the 6 th December, 2011 and 8 th May, 2012 IN THE SUPREME COURT FOR ZAMBIA HOLDEN AT NDOLA (Criminal Jurisdiction) SCZ/103/2011 BETWEEN: JOSEPH MWAMBA KALENGA APPELLANT VS THE PEOPLE RESPONDENT Coram: SAKALA, CJ, MUYOVWE and MUSONDA, JJS On the

More information

THE IMMIGRATION ACTS. On 23 February 2015 On 18 March Before UPPER TRIBUNAL JUDGE LATTER. Between SECRETARY OF STATE FOR THE HOME DEPARTMENT

THE IMMIGRATION ACTS. On 23 February 2015 On 18 March Before UPPER TRIBUNAL JUDGE LATTER. Between SECRETARY OF STATE FOR THE HOME DEPARTMENT - Upper Tribunal (Immigration and Asylum Chamber) Appeal Numbers: AA/06792/2014 THE IMMIGRATION ACTS Heard at Field House Promulgated On 23 February 2015 On 18 March 2015 Before UPPER TRIBUNAL JUDGE LATTER

More information

THE IMMIGRATION ACTS. Promulgated On 17 th March 2015 On 23 rd March 2015 Prepared on 17 th March Before DEPUTY UPPER TRIBUNAL JUDGE WOODCRAFT

THE IMMIGRATION ACTS. Promulgated On 17 th March 2015 On 23 rd March 2015 Prepared on 17 th March Before DEPUTY UPPER TRIBUNAL JUDGE WOODCRAFT IAC-FH-AR/V1 Upper Tribunal (Immigration and Asylum Chamber) Appeal Number: IA/52919/2013 THE IMMIGRATION ACTS Heard at Field House Decision and Reasons Promulgated On 17 th March 2015 On 23 rd March 2015

More information

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL. and THE DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC PROSECUTIONS

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL. and THE DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC PROSECUTIONS SAINT CHRISTOPHER AND NEVIS CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.7 OF 2003 IN THE COURT OF APPEAL BETWEEN: EGBERT HANLEY and THE DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC PROSECUTIONS Appellant Respondent Before: The Hon. Mr. Adrian Saunders

More information

Criminal Case No. 12 of 2004 in the District Court of Liwale. It was alleged by

Criminal Case No. 12 of 2004 in the District Court of Liwale. It was alleged by IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF TANZANIA AT MTWARA (CORAM: RAMADHANI, C.J., MUNUO, J.A. And MJASIRI, J.A.) CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 153 OF 2005 KALOS PUNDA...APPELLANT VERSUS THE REPUBLIC...RESPONDENT (Appeal from

More information

THE IMMIGRATION ACTS. Before UPPER TRIBUNAL JUDGE KEKIĆ. Between GLEZIER PALMER-LUIS (ANONYMITY ORDER NOT MADE) and

THE IMMIGRATION ACTS. Before UPPER TRIBUNAL JUDGE KEKIĆ. Between GLEZIER PALMER-LUIS (ANONYMITY ORDER NOT MADE) and Upper Tribunal (Immigration and Asylum Chamber) Appeal Number: DA/00604/2016 THE IMMIGRATION ACTS Heard at Field House Determination Promulgated On 20 July 2017 On 25 July 2017 Before UPPER TRIBUNAL JUDGE

More information

2017 PA Super 67 : : : : : : : : :

2017 PA Super 67 : : : : : : : : : 2017 PA Super 67 T.K. A.Z. v. Appellant IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA No. 1261 WDA 2016 Appeal from the Order Entered August 3, 2016 In the Court of Common Pleas of Cambria County Civil Division

More information

THE IMMIGRATION ACTS. Heard at Field House Decision & Reasons Promulgated On 31 March 2016 On 19 April Before

THE IMMIGRATION ACTS. Heard at Field House Decision & Reasons Promulgated On 31 March 2016 On 19 April Before IAC-FH-AR-V1 Upper Tribunal (Immigration and Asylum Chamber) Appeal Number: AA/06365/2015 THE IMMIGRATION ACTS Heard at Field House Decision & Reasons Promulgated On 31 March 2016 On 19 April 2016 Before

More information

THE IMMIGRATION ACTS. Before DEPUTY UPPER TRIBUNAL JUDGE WOODCRAFT. Between. MR SULEMAN MASIH (Anonymity order not made) and

THE IMMIGRATION ACTS. Before DEPUTY UPPER TRIBUNAL JUDGE WOODCRAFT. Between. MR SULEMAN MASIH (Anonymity order not made) and Upper Tribunal (Immigration and Asylum Chamber) THE IMMIGRATION ACTS Heard at Field House Decision & Reasons Promulgated Heard on 22 nd of January 2018 On 13 th of February 2018 Prepared on 31 st of January

More information

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL KENNETH HARRIS. and SARAH GERALD

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL KENNETH HARRIS. and SARAH GERALD MONTSERRAT CIVIL APPEAL NO.3 OF 2003 BETWEEN: IN THE COURT OF APPEAL KENNETH HARRIS and SARAH GERALD Before: The Hon. Mr. Brian Alleyne, SC The Hon. Mr. Michael Gordon, QC The Hon Madam Suzie d Auvergne

More information

THE IMMIGRATION ACT. Before DEPUTY UPPER TRIBUNAL JUDGE MCCLURE. Between NC (ANONYMITY DIRECTION MADE) And

THE IMMIGRATION ACT. Before DEPUTY UPPER TRIBUNAL JUDGE MCCLURE. Between NC (ANONYMITY DIRECTION MADE) And Upper Tribunal (Immigration and Asylum Chamber) Appeal Number: PA/14028/2016 THE IMMIGRATION ACT Heard at Field House Decision & Reasons Promulgated On 21 st March 2018 On 6 th April 2018 Before DEPUTY

More information

IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA (TRANSVAAL PROVINCIAL DIVISION)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA (TRANSVAAL PROVINCIAL DIVISION) IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA (TRANSVAAL PROVINCIAL DIVISION) UNREPORTABLE In the matter between: Date: 2009-02-06 Case Number: A306/2007 AARON TSHOSANE Appellant and THE STATE Respondent JUDGMENT

More information

SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND

SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND CITATION: R v D [2003] QCA 148 PARTIES: R v D (appellant/applicant) FILE NO/S: CA No 207 of 2002 CA No 232 of 2002 DC No 163 of 2002 DIVISION: PROCEEDINGS: ORIGINATING COURT:

More information

THE IMMIGRATION ACTS. Promulgated On 21 January 2015 On 11 February Before UPPER TRIBUNAL JUDGE DEANS. Between MR AQIB HUSSAIN.

THE IMMIGRATION ACTS. Promulgated On 21 January 2015 On 11 February Before UPPER TRIBUNAL JUDGE DEANS. Between MR AQIB HUSSAIN. Upper Tribunal (Immigration and Asylum Chamber) Appeal Number: DA/01309/2014 THE IMMIGRATION ACTS Heard at Glasgow Determination Promulgated On 21 January 2015 On 11 February 2015 Before UPPER TRIBUNAL

More information

IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA GAUTENG DIVISION, PRETORIA

IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA GAUTENG DIVISION, PRETORIA SAFLII Note: Certain personal/private details of parties or witnesses have been redacted from this document in compliance with the law and SAFLII Policy IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA GAUTENG DIVISION,

More information

committing an offence of armed robbery contrary to section 287 (A) of the Penal Code, Cap. 16 of the Laws R.E He was sentenced to thirty

committing an offence of armed robbery contrary to section 287 (A) of the Penal Code, Cap. 16 of the Laws R.E He was sentenced to thirty 1 IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF TANZANIA AT MTWARA (CORAM: MUNUO, J.A., MBAROUK, J.A., And BWANA, J.A.) CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 121 OF 2009 MAULIDI WAJIBU @ HASSANI... APPELLANT VERSUS THE REPUBLIC... RESPONDENT

More information

IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA GAUTENG DIVISION, PRETORIA

IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA GAUTENG DIVISION, PRETORIA ,. I I: ' IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA GAUTENG DIVISION, PRETORIA (1) R,EPORTABLE: YES/ NO (2) OF INTEREST TO OTHER JUDGES: YES/ NO (3) REVISED a., 11 tidtf: a.t. DATE SIGNATURE CASE NUMBER: A178/16

More information

Cotton, T. (2010) 'Court of appeal: Confession evidence and the circumstances requiring a voir dire', Journal of Criminal Law, 74 (5), pp

Cotton, T. (2010) 'Court of appeal: Confession evidence and the circumstances requiring a voir dire', Journal of Criminal Law, 74 (5), pp TeesRep - Teesside's Research Repository Court of appeal: Confession evidence and the circumstances requiring a voir dire Item type Authors Citation DOI Publisher Journal Additional Link Rights Article

More information

(CORAM: MSOFFE, J. A., KILEO, J. A. And KALEGEYA, J. A.)

(CORAM: MSOFFE, J. A., KILEO, J. A. And KALEGEYA, J. A.) IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF TANZANIA AT TANGA CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 130 OF 2005 MSOFFE, J.A SEIF SELEMANI VS THE REPUBLIC (Appeal from the Judgment of the High Court of Tanzania at Tanga by Longway, J 1) -

More information

COUNSEL FOR THE APPELLANT : Mr M.E SETUMU COUNSEL FOR RESPONDENT : ADV. NONTENJWA

COUNSEL FOR THE APPELLANT : Mr M.E SETUMU COUNSEL FOR RESPONDENT : ADV. NONTENJWA . Reportable: Circulate to Judges: Circulate to Magistrates: Circulate to Regional Magistrates: YES / NO YES / NO YES / NO YES / NO SAFLII Note: Certain personal/private details of parties or witnesses

More information

[1] This appeal, which is against both the conviction and the sentence, is with leave of

[1] This appeal, which is against both the conviction and the sentence, is with leave of P a g e 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA (NORTH GAUTENG, PRETORIA) CASE NO: A259/10 (1) REPORTABLE: YES / NO (2) OF INTEREST TO OTHER JUDGES: YES/NO (3) REVISED. 18/04/2013.. DATE... SIGNATURE In the

More information

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF OHIO SIXTH APPELLATE DISTRICT WILLIAMS COUNTY. Court of Appeals No. WM Appellee Trial Court No.

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF OHIO SIXTH APPELLATE DISTRICT WILLIAMS COUNTY. Court of Appeals No. WM Appellee Trial Court No. [Cite as State v. Robbins, 2012-Ohio-3862.] IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF OHIO SIXTH APPELLATE DISTRICT WILLIAMS COUNTY State of Ohio Court of Appeals No. WM-11-012 Appellee Trial Court No. 10 CR 103 v. Barry

More information

SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND

SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND CITATION: R v Reed [2014] QCA 207 PARTIES: R v REED, Troy William (appellant) FILE NO/S: CA No 287 of 2013 SC No 43 of 2013 DIVISION: PROCEEDING: ORIGINATING COURT: Court of

More information

THE IMMIGRATION ACTS. On 14 March 2006 On 18 April 2006 Prepared. Before

THE IMMIGRATION ACTS. On 14 March 2006 On 18 April 2006 Prepared. Before Asylum and Immigration Tribunal RH (Para 289A/HC395 - no discretion) Bangladesh [2006] UKAIT 00043 THE IMMIGRATION ACTS Heard at Field House Determination Promulgated On 14 March 2006 On 18 April 2006

More information

IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA (BOPHUTHATSWANA PROVINCIAL DIVISION)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA (BOPHUTHATSWANA PROVINCIAL DIVISION) IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA (BOPHUTHATSWANA PROVINCIAL DIVISION) CA 192/2003 In the matter between: PHILLIP GAELEJWE APPELLANT and THE STATE RESPONDENT CRIMINAL APPEAL MMABATHO DATE OF HEARING :

More information

NO CR. RAFAELA DAVILA, Appellant. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

NO CR. RAFAELA DAVILA, Appellant. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee Opinion issued February 11, 2010 In The Court of Appeals For The First District of Texas NO. 01-08-00176-CR RAFAELA DAVILA, Appellant v. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee On Appeal from the 400th District Court

More information

SUPREME COURT NGULUBE, D.C.J., GARDNER AND MUWO, J.J.S. 14TH SEPTEMBER AND 5TH OCTOBER,1982 (S.C.Z. JUDGMENT NO.28 OF 1982) APPEAL NO.

SUPREME COURT NGULUBE, D.C.J., GARDNER AND MUWO, J.J.S. 14TH SEPTEMBER AND 5TH OCTOBER,1982 (S.C.Z. JUDGMENT NO.28 OF 1982) APPEAL NO. THE PEOPLE (1982) Z.R. 115 (S.C.) SUPREME COURT NGULUBE, D.C.J., GARDNER AND MUWO, J.J.S. 14TH SEPTEMBER AND 5TH OCTOBER,1982 (S.C.Z. JUDGMENT NO.28 OF 1982) APPEAL NO.72 OF 1982 Flynote Criminal law and

More information

SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND

SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND CITATION: Gardner Snr v DPP (Qld) [2009] QCA 29 PARTIES: MICHAEL BENNETT GARDNER Snr (applicant/appellant) v DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC PROSECUTIONS (QUEENSLAND) (respondent) FILE NO/S:

More information

No: D4 IN THE COURT OF APPEAL CRIMINAL DIVISION Royal Courts of Justice Strand London, WC2A 2LL. B e f o r e: LORD JUSTICE MOSES

No: D4 IN THE COURT OF APPEAL CRIMINAL DIVISION Royal Courts of Justice Strand London, WC2A 2LL. B e f o r e: LORD JUSTICE MOSES Neutral Citation Number: [2012] EWCA Crim 2055 No: 201102990 D4 IN THE COURT OF APPEAL CRIMINAL DIVISION Royal Courts of Justice Strand London, WC2A 2LL Thursday, 14 June 2012 B e f o r e: LORD JUSTICE

More information

kenyalawreports.or.ke

kenyalawreports.or.ke REPUBLIC OF KENYA IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT MACHAKOS APPELLATE SIDE HIGH COURT CRIMINAL APPEAL 184 OF 2002 (From Original Conviction(s) and Sentence(s) in Criminal Case No 1320 of 2001 of the Principal

More information

HEARING DISCIPLINARY COMMITTEE OF THE ASSOCIATION OF CHARTERED CERTIFIED ACCOUNTANTS

HEARING DISCIPLINARY COMMITTEE OF THE ASSOCIATION OF CHARTERED CERTIFIED ACCOUNTANTS DISCIPLINARY COMMITTEE OF THE ASSOCIATION OF CHARTERED CERTIFIED ACCOUNTANTS REASONS FOR DECISION In the matter of: Mr Jawad Raza Heard on: Thursday 7 and Friday 8 June 2018 Location: ACCA Head Offices,

More information

CORAM : NESTADT, STEYNet HOWIE JJA DATE OF HEARING : 9 MARCH 1995 DATE OF JUDGMENT : 17 AUGUST 1995 JUDGMENT HOWIE JA/ Case number 212/93

CORAM : NESTADT, STEYNet HOWIE JJA DATE OF HEARING : 9 MARCH 1995 DATE OF JUDGMENT : 17 AUGUST 1995 JUDGMENT HOWIE JA/ Case number 212/93 Case number 212/93 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA (APPELLATE DIVISION) In the matter between: KHULIKILE ALFRED JIBILIZA Appellant and THE STATE Respondent CORAM : NESTADT, STEYNet HOWIE JJA DATE

More information

COURT OF APPEAL FOR ONTARIO

COURT OF APPEAL FOR ONTARIO BETWEEN: CITATION: R. v. Sherret-Robinson, 2009 ONCA 886 DATE: 20091214 DOCKET: C47467 COURT OF APPEAL FOR ONTARIO Rosenberg, Rouleau and Watt JJ.A. Her Majesty the Queen and Respondent Sherry Sherret-Robinson

More information

IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA (WESTERN CAPE HIGH COURT, CAPE TOWN

IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA (WESTERN CAPE HIGH COURT, CAPE TOWN IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA (WESTERN CAPE HIGH COURT, CAPE TOWN High Court Case No.: A97/12 DPP Referece No.:.9/2/5/1-56/12 In the appeal between- THULANI DYANTYANA Appellant and THE STATE Respondent

More information

THE IMMIGRATION ACTS. Heard at Columbus House, Newport Sent to parties on: On 3 April 2017 On 23 May Before DEPUTY UPPER TRIBUNAL JUDGE L MURRAY

THE IMMIGRATION ACTS. Heard at Columbus House, Newport Sent to parties on: On 3 April 2017 On 23 May Before DEPUTY UPPER TRIBUNAL JUDGE L MURRAY Upper Tribunal (Immigration and Asylum Chamber) Appeal Number: AA/06052/2014 THE IMMIGRATION ACTS Heard at Columbus House, Newport Sent to parties on: On 3 April 2017 On 23 May 2017 Before DEPUTY UPPER

More information

SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND

SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND CITATION: R v SCW [2018] QCA 10 PARTIES: R v SCW (appellant) FILE NO/S: CA No 104 of 2017 DC No 959 of 2016 DIVISION: PROCEEDING: ORIGINATING COURT: Court of Appeal Appeal against

More information

THE IMMIGRATION ACTS. On: 2 May 2018 On: 8 May Before UPPER TRIBUNAL JUDGE KEBEDE. Between [G N] and

THE IMMIGRATION ACTS. On: 2 May 2018 On: 8 May Before UPPER TRIBUNAL JUDGE KEBEDE. Between [G N] and Upper Tribunal (Immigration and Asylum Chamber) THE IMMIGRATION ACTS Heard at: Field House Decision & Reasons Promulgated On: 2 May 2018 On: 8 May 2018 Before UPPER TRIBUNAL JUDGE KEBEDE Between [G N]

More information