Burkhart v Bradley
| Jurisdiction | Northern Territory |
| Court | Court of Appeal |
| Judge | Southwood,Kelly,Barr JJ |
| Judgment Date | 31 May 2013 |
| Date | 31 May 2013 |
| Docket Number | FILE NO: AP 11 of 2012 (21132195) |
-
- This document is available in original version only for vLex customers
View this document and try vLex for 7 days - TRY VLEX
- This document is available in original version only for vLex customers
4 cases
-
The Queen v Rolfe (No. 4)
...at trial. I have considered the questions of admissibility on the basis that s 208E will be raised at trial as a separate defence. 2 [2013] NTCA 5; (2013) 33 NTLR 79 at para [27]; and see R v Hutchinson & Wilkinson [2018] NSWSC 1759 at [309] per Hamill J; Doran and Brunton v DPP [2019] NSWS......
-
Wayne Martin v Suzanne Louise Kendrick
...165 CLR 314 ; Gipp v R (1998) 194 CLR 106; M v R (1994) 181 CLR 487; Jones v The Queen (1997) 191 CLR 439; applied Burkhart v Bradley [2013] NTCA 5 ; C v Gokel [1999] NTSC 93; Clark v Trenerry [1999] NTSC 17; Fox v Percy (2003) 214 CLR 118; Knight v The Queen (1992) 175 CLR 495; Morris v R ......
-
Melinda Edwards v Derek Tasker
...[71]. 32 Reasons [25], [43]. 33 Appellant's Submissions, p 19, par 60(3). The relevant “test at law” was explained in Burkhart v Bradley [2013] NTCA 5 at [11] et seq. Counsel for the present appellant argued at the hearing before the magistrate that the only potential lawful justification f......
-
James Darren Fernando(Appellant) v Justin Anthony Firth
...Counsel: Appellant: J Hardy Respondent: S Ledek Fox v Percy (2003) 214 CLR 118 ; Libke v The Queen (2007) 230 CLR 559; Burkhart v Bradley [2013] NTCA 5, 33 NTLR 79, followed McMaster v The Queen (1994) 4 NTLR 92 ; Davis v Bennett (2003) 13 NTLR 1, referred to Criminal Code Act (NT) s 1, s 2......