Azzopardi v R

JurisdictionAustralia Federal only
JudgeGleeson CJ,Gaudron,Gummow,Kirby,Hayne JJ,McHugh J,Callinan J
Judgment Date03 May 2001
Neutral Citation[2001] HCA 25,2001-0503 HCA A
CourtHigh Court
Docket NumberS105/2000
Date03 May 2001
    • This document is available in original version only for vLex customers

      View this document and try vLex for 7 days
    • TRY VLEX
152 cases
  • Hargraves v The Queen
    • Australia
    • High Court
    • 26 October 2011
    ...on the part of the accused. That topic was not discussed at all in argument. Authorities in this Court like RPS v The Queen49 and Azzopardi v The Queen50 have settled the law, but only over the type of dissenting judgment which is usually described as ‘strong’ — by McHugh J in the first cas......
  • Commonwealth of Australia v Helicopter Resources Pty Ltd
    • Australia
    • High Court
    • 24 April 2020
    ...& M c 13 (1554-5); Statute 2 & 3 Ph & M c 10 (1555). See Grassby v The Queen (1989) 168 CLR 1 at 11 per Dawson J; Azzopardi v The Queen (2001) 205 CLR 50 at 96-97 [136] per McHugh J; Crawford v Washington (2004) 541 US 36 at 43-44 per Scalia J for the Court; Australian Crime Commission v St......
  • Eastman v R
    • Australia
    • Federal Court
    • Invalid date
  • R v Keenan
    • Australia
    • High Court
    • 2 February 2009
    ...QCA 440 at [44]. 96 s 7(1)(b). 97 s 7(1)(c). 98 s 7(1)(d). 99 [2007] QCA 440 at [43]. 101 Alford v Magee (1952) 85 CLR 437 at 466 ; Azzopardi v The Queen (2001) 205 CLR 50 at 69 [49]; [2001] HCA 25. 102 R v Keenan [2007] QCA 440 at [16]. 103 R v Barlow (1997) 188 CLR 1 at 11 per Brennan CJ......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
4 books & journal articles
  • The Importance of Full and Frank Disclosure in Family Law Financial Proceedings and the Many Consequences of Non-Disclosure
    • United Kingdom
    • Federal Law Review No. 45-1, March 2017
    • 1 March 2017
    ...starting point to consider the duty in Australia. Pursuant to rr 13.01(1)–(2), the duty applies with respect 37 Azzopardi v The Queen (2001) 205 CLR 50, 75 [68] (Gaudron, Gummow, Kirby and Hayne JJ), interpreting Weissensteiner v The Queen (1993) 178 CLR 217. See also R v Baden-Clay (2016) ......
  • Human Rights in the High Court of Australia, 1976-2003: The Righting of Australian Law?
    • United Kingdom
    • Federal Law Review No. 33-2, June 2005
    • 1 June 2005
    ...to the sea and sea-bed under common law authorities recognising native title and under Native Title Act 1993 (Cth)); Azzopardi v R (2001) 205 CLR 50 (Gaudron, Gummow, Kirby, Hayne and McHugh JJ re: requirements of a fair trial); Brodie v Singleton Shire Council; Ghantous v Hawkesbury Shire ......
  • FORENSIC SCIENCE EVIDENCE AND THE LIMITS OF CROSS-EXAMINATION.
    • Australia
    • Melbourne University Law Review Vol. 42 No. 3, August 2019
    • 1 April 2019
    ...Roque (n 23). (212) JP (Trial Transcript) (27 January) (n 68) 29. (213) See Woolmington v DPP (UK) [1935] AC 462; Azzopardi v The Queen (2001) 205 CLR 50; X7 v Australian Crime Commission (2013) 248 CLR (214) There may be a few exceptions, such as where there is a 'rock solid' alibi or a DN......
  • The influence of Professor J.H. Wigmore on evidence law in Australia
    • United Kingdom
    • International Journal of Evidence & Proof, The No. 19-1, January 2015
    • 1 January 2015
    ...(Little Brown, 1904). Cited as Wigmore’s Treatise, later editions cited as Wigmore’sTreatise (Tillers rev., 1983). 4. Azzopardi v R (2001) 205 CLR 50, per McHugh J at [119], but see further below at n. 115 regarding the observation by J, at [120], of the inaccuracy of Wigmore’s (and also Pr......

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT