Your World of Legal Intelligence
 Australia | 1-800-335-6202

Cheng v R

Judgment Cited authorities 36 Cited in 50 Precedent Map Related
Vincent
JurisdictionAustralia Federal only
CourtHigh Court
JudgeGleeson CJ,Gummow,Hayne JJ,Gaudron J,McHugh J,Kirby J,Callinan J
Judgment Date05 October 2000
Neutral Citation2000-1005 HCA A,[2000] HCA 53
Date05 October 2000
Docket NumberA8/1999
    • This document is available in original version only for vLex customers

      View this document and try vLex for 7 days
    • TRY VLEX
41 cases
  • Ly v Jenkins
    • Australia
    • Federal Court
    • Invalid date
  • O'donoghue v Ireland; Zentai v Republic of Hungary; Williams v United States of America
    • Australia
    • High Court
    • 23 Abril 2008
    ....... 7 (2003) 215 CLR 185 ; [2003] HCA 3 . . 8 521 US 898 (1997). . 9 Cheng v The Queen (2000) 203 CLR 248 at 270 [58]; [2000] HCA 53 . . 10 R v Kirby; Ex parte Boilermakers' Society of Australia ......
  • Cheung v R
    • Australia
    • High Court
    • 22 Noviembre 2001
    ...and that the relevant constitutional mandate that the appellant be tried by jury, was complied with. 53 As was pointed out in Cheng v The Queen26, the constitutional command in s 80 is directed to jury trial of issues joined between prosecution and accused; the process of sentencing is for ......
  • ICM Agriculture Pty Ltd v The Commonwealth
    • Australia
    • High Court
    • 9 Diciembre 2009
    ...Ltd v New South Wales (1927) 40 CLR 333 at 347, 356; [1927] HCA 50. 178Lambert v Weichelt (1954) 28 ALJ 282 at 283; Cheng v The Queen (2000) 203 CLR 248 at 270 [58]; [2000] HCA 53; Re Patterson; Ex parte Taylor (2001) 207 CLR 391 at 473–474 [249]–[252]; [2001] HCA 51; BHP Billiton Ltd v Sch......
    • Request a trial to view additional results
9 books & journal articles
  • Rights protection without judicial supremacy: a review of the Canadian and British models of bills of rights.
    • Australia
    • Melbourne University Law Review Vol. 26 Nbr. 2, August 2002
    • 1 Agosto 2002
    ...religion (s 116), and the right to be free from discrimination on the basis of interstate residence (s 117). (8) Eg Cheng v The Queen (2000) 203 CLR 248; King v Jones (1972) 128 CLR (9) For example, the separation of judicial power from executive and legislative power (Brandy v Human Rights......
  • Heresy as Orthodoxy: Were the Founders Progressivists?
    • United Kingdom
    • Federal Law Review Nbr. 31-1, March 2003
    • 1 Marzo 2003
    ...Goulburn Correctional Centre; Ex parte Eastman (1999) 200 CLR 322,355; Eastman v The Queen (2000) 203 CLR 1, 79; Cheng v The Queen (2000) 203 CLR 248, 321;Brownlee v The Queen (2001) 207 CLR 278, 321–2; Kirby, above n 3, 10–14; Dan Meagher,'New Day Rising? Non-Originalism, Justice Kirby and......
  • The never-ending challenge of drafting and interpreting statutes - a meditation on the career of John Finemore QC.
    • Australia
    • Melbourne University Law Review Vol. 36 Nbr. 1, April 2012
    • 1 Abril 2012
    ...(32) (1938) 59 CLR 556. (33) Ibid 581-2. (34) (1985) 159 CLR 264, 276-7 (Gibbs CJ, Wilson and Dawson JJ). (35) Ibid 298 (Deane J). (36) (2000) 203 CLR 248. (37) Ibid 292-9 [130]-[152] (McHugh J). I say 'surprisingly' because of McHugh JA's powerful espousal of a purposive construction of or......
  • “A Puny Thing Indeed”1—Cheng V the Queen and the Constitutional Right to Trial by Jury
    • United Kingdom
    • Federal Law Review Nbr. 29-1, March 2001
    • 1 Marzo 2001
    ...In addition, Kirby_____________________________________________________________________________________1 Cheng v The Queen [2000] HCA 53; (2000) 175 ALR 338; per Kirby J at [250] referring to theprevailing interpretation of s 80 of the Constitution.* BA/LLB (ANU), Lecturer, Faculty of Law, ......
    • Request a trial to view additional results

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