Rosas v Cahill
| Jurisdiction | Northern Territory |
| Court | Supreme Court |
| Judge | Blokland J |
| Judgment Date | 08 October 2013 |
| Neutral Citation | [2013] NTSC 65 |
| Docket Number | FILE NO: 21202735 |
| Date | 08 October 2013 |
Get this document and AI-powered insights with a free trial of vLex and Vincent AI
Get Started for FreeUnlock 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
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
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
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
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
Start Your 7-day Trial
2 cases
-
Kerry Rigby v Chea May Taing
...R Murphy Respondent: A Abayasekara He Kaw Teh v The Queen (1985) 157 CLR 523 ; Kruger v Kidson (2004) 14 NTLR 91; Rosas v Cahill [2013] NTSC 65; Tabe v The Queen (2005) 225 CLR 418; Western Australia v R (2007) 33 WAR 483, applied Grosvenor v The Queen [2014] NTCCA 5 ; Pereira v Director of......
-
Heath v Rout and Heath v Pearce
...Respondents REPRESENTATION: Counsel: Appellant: R Murphy Respondent: S Lapinski Rockman v Smallridge [2012] NTSC 56 ; Rosas v Cahill [2013] NTSC 65; Turley v Byrne [2009] NTSC 22, referred to Criminal Code Part 11AA Emergency Response Act s 12 Liquor Act (NT) s 75, s 75(1)(a), s 75B (1), s ......
