Where a specific power exists, that power ought be preferred. But where a specific power exists, that doesn't (without more) invalidate the existence of a more general power.G A, MM & P J v The Queen provides a simple demonstration of the principle. There is a specific warrant to search a vehicle for drugs available …
Continue reading GA, MM & PJ v The Queen [2012] VSCA 44: Acting without warrant
There are two essential ingredients to a charge of speeding in Victoria (and, therefore, probably across Australia):(1) the driving of a motor vehicle; and (2) in excess of the speed limit.More information might be nice, but it's not essential. There are more things that the prosecution are required to prove an offence under Road Rule …
Continue reading DPP v Kirtley [2012] VSC 78: the two essential elements of speeding
There is a right to representation as part of an accused's overarching right to a fair criminal trial, but it's rarely going to give rise to an enforceable remedy. (And what is a right without a remedy?) When faced with the unavoidable prospect of an unfair trial, a trial court should not order unwilling representation …
Continue reading Slaveski v Smith & Anor [2012] VSCA 25: the right to representation
There is a right to representation as part of an accused's overarching right to a fair criminal trial, but it's rarely going to give rise to an enforceable remedy. (And what is a right without a remedy?) When faced with the unavoidable prospect of an unfair trial, a trial court should not order unwilling representation …
Continue reading Slaveski v Smith & Anor [2012] VSCA 25: the right to representation
Down at Geelong on Friday I heard about a new case that seems likely to head to the Supreme Court: DPP v Novakovic. Apparently it's listed before the Supreme Court on 16 February 2012 to set down the questions of law, and timetable for filing materials before it is set for hearing. As I understand …