Parker v R

JurisdictionAustralia Federal only
Neutral Citation[1997] HCA 15,1997-0411 HCA A
Date1997
Year1997
CourtHigh Court

Get this document and AI-powered insights with a free trial of vLex and Vincent AI

Get Started for Free

Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial

Transform your legal research with vLex

  • Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform

  • Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues

  • Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options

  • Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions

  • Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms

  • Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations

vLex

Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial

Transform your legal research with vLex

  • Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform

  • Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues

  • Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options

  • Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions

  • Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms

  • Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations

vLex

Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial

Transform your legal research with vLex

  • Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform

  • Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues

  • Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options

  • Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions

  • Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms

  • Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations

vLex

Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial

Transform your legal research with vLex

  • Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform

  • Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues

  • Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options

  • Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions

  • Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms

  • Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations

vLex

Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial

Transform your legal research with vLex

  • Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform

  • Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues

  • Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options

  • Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions

  • Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms

  • Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations

vLex

Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial

Transform your legal research with vLex

  • Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform

  • Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues

  • Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options

  • Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions

  • Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms

  • Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations

vLex
33 cases
  • The Queen v Tang
    • Australia
    • High Court
    • 28 August 2008
    ...188 CLR 1 at 32; [1997] HCA 19. The passage cites Vallance v The Queen (1961) 108 CLR 56 at 75–76; [1961] HCA 42 and Parker v The Queen (1997) 186 CLR 494 at 517–519; [1997] HCA 114 Reasons of Gleeson CJ at [49]. 115 Referring to He Kaw Teh (1985) 157 CLR 523 at 568. 116 This is a special e......
  • R v Taufahema
    • Australia
    • High Court
    • 21 March 2007
    ...v The Queen is of a quite different kind from the two ‘cases’ in the present application for special leave to appeal. 66 Finally, in Parker v The Queen59 Dawson, Toohey and McHugh JJ refused to order a new trial to enable the prosecution to present a fresh case which would require ‘a substa......
  • David Harold Eastman v DPP
    • Australia
    • Supreme Court of ACT
    • 22 August 2014
    ...the alleged offence and the new trial, and in particular whether the delay will occasion prejudice to the accused ( Taufahema at [55]; Parker v The Queen [1997] HCA 15; (1997) 186 CLR 494 at 520 (Dawson, Toohey and McHugh JJ); Anderson at 453); • whether the grant of a new trial would impe......
  • R v Tang
    • Australia
    • High Court
    • 28 August 2008
    ...HCA 19(Barlow). The passage cites Vallance v. RUNK(1961) 108 CLR 56 at 75–6; [1963] ALR 461 at 474–5; [1961] HCA 42 and Parker v. RUNK(1997) 186 CLR 494 at 517–19; 143 ALR 293 at 309–10; [1997] HCA 114 Reasons of Gleeson CJ at para. 49. 115 Referring to He Kaw TehUNK at CLR 568; ALR 481. 11......
  • Get Started for Free
1 books & journal articles
  • Theft principle in private law: the Australian experience
    • Barbados
    • Caribbean Law Review No. 19-1/2, June 2009
    • 1 June 2009
    ...v ANZ Banking Group Ltd (NSW Supreme Court BC9302376, 7 October, 1993); Zobory v Commissioner of Taxation (1995) 64 FCR 86; Parker v R (1997) 186 CLR 494; Cashflow Finance Pty Ltd (in liq) v Westpac Banking Corporation [1999] NSWSC 671; Menzies v Perkins [2000] NSWSC 40; National Australia ......