Weissensteiner v R
| Jurisdiction | Australia Federal only |
| Neutral Citation | 1993-1117 HCA C,[1993] HCA 65 |
| Date | 1993 |
| Court | High Court |
-
- 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
153 cases
- Minister for Immigration and Multicultural and Indigenous Affairs v Craig
-
Azzopardi v R
...an accused who gives evidence, or makes a statement, to contradict or explain some evidence, see R v Guiren (1962) 79 WN (NSW) 811. 2 (1993) 178 CLR 217. 3 Mason CJ, Deane and Dawson JJ at 227; Brennan and Toohey JJ at 4 (1964) 118 CLR 600 at 615. 5 [1997] 1 SCR 874 . 6 (1964) 118 CLR 600 a......
- News Ltd v ARFL
-
Australian Securities and Investments Commission v Hellicar
...is the passage in G v H, for the proposition Brennan and McHugh JJ assert is immediately thereafter illustrated by a quotation from Weissensteiner v The Queen235 that sets out the rule in Jones v Dunkel. 253 Secondly, not one of these passages asserts the Court of Appeal's proposition that ......
Request a trial to view additional results
3 books & journal articles
-
The Importance of Full and Frank Disclosure in Family Law Financial Proceedings and the Many Consequences of Non-Disclosure
...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) 90 ALJR 1013, 1021 [50]–[52] (French CJ, Kiefel, Bell, Keane and Gordon JJ). Cf Criminal Justice and Public O......
-
The influence of Professor J.H. Wigmore on evidence law in Australia
...witness to be examined pursuant to the Australian Crime Commission Act 2002 (Cth). 64. (2000) 199 CLR 620.65. Weissensteiner v R (1993) 178 CLR 217, 224. In Azzopardi, above n. 4, McHugh J at [120] held that based on more research the historical accuracy of Wigmore (and Professor Holdsworth......
-
The evidentiary value of an accused’s invocation of the pre-trial and trial right to silence through Anglo-American case law
...ma de, in the sense t hat it is not induce d by any promis e or threat proce eding f rom a person in auth ority.66 Weissensteiner v R (1993) 178 CLR 217 at 227–9, 235–6. See also Petty and Maiden v Th e Queen supra not e 23 (Austra lia); R v Nicolls (1951) NZLR 91 (New Zeal and); S v Letsok......