© 2026 Zoe. All rights reserved.
Zoe is a legal information platform. Always consult the Federal Register of Legislation for authoritative text.
[2010] VSCA 289
Court of Appeal (Vic)
2010-10-19
NETTLE, NEAVE and HARPER JJA
Original judgment source is linked above.
[1] Count 1 (indecent assault in period beginning 3 January 1984).
[2] Count 9 (indecent assault in period ending 31 December 1989).
[3] Count 10 (indecent assault in period beginning 19 September 1986).
[4] Count 15 (indecent assault in period ending 18 September 1990).
[5] She relied on Jago v District Court of New South Wales [1989] HCA 46; (1989) 168 CLR 23; Boulos v The Queen [2008] NSWCCA 119, [10] (James J).
[8] [1989] HCA 46; (1989) 168 CLR 23 ('Jago'), 58.
[9] Ruling (Unreported, County Court of Victoria, Judge Sexton, 27 August 2010), [20].
[10] The period covered by count 1, which alleged that he had indecently assaulted SRC between 3 January 1984 and 2 January 1986, ended the day before the period covered by the offence to which he pleaded guilty, 3 January to 15 February 1986.
[11] See for example Wells v The Queen [2010] VSCA 100.
[12] [2009] HCA 20; (2009) 255 ALR 399, 405.
[13] Jago [1989] HCA 46; (1989) 168 CLR 23, 34 (Mason CJ), 47 (Brennan J); Williams v Spautz [1992] HCA 34; (1992) 174 CLR 509, 519 (Mason CJ, Dawson, Toohey and McHugh JJ).
[14] R v Tiso (1990) 12 Cr App R (S) 122, 125 (Taylor LJ).
[15] Crimes Act 1958, ss 61(1A), (1B), but see also s 61(1)(b).
[16] See for example R v Birdsall (Unreported, NSW Court of Criminal Appeal, Cole JA, Grove and Simpson JJ, 3 March 1997), where the delay was 34 years.
[20] Boulos v The Queen [2008] NSWCCA 119, [41] (James J).
[21] House v The King [1936] HCA 40; (1936) 55 CLR 499, 504-5 (Dixon, Evatt and McTiernan JJ).
[22] R v Shamouil [2006] NSWCCA 112, [63] (Spigelman CJ).
[26] [2010] VSCA 135, [27].
[27] AE v R [2008] NSWCCA 52.
[29] [2006] NSWCCA 112, [63].
P G
The Queen [2010] VSCA 289
CRIMINAL LAW - Appeal - Interlocutory appeal - 11 counts of indecent assault and four counts of taking part in an act of sexual penetration with a child under 10 - Refusal to exercise discretion to order permanent stay of proceedings - Applicant previously convicted of indecent assault of one of the complainants - Subsequent prosecution for further offences committed against same complainant and her sister during similar but not same period not oppressive - Unavailability of record of interview, period of delay and use of previous conviction as tendency evidence did not make subsequent proceedings an abuse of process - Jago v District Court of New South Wales [1989] HCA 46; (1989) 168 CLR 23, applied.
(1989) 168 CLR 23
(2009) 252 ALR 612
(2009) 255 ALR 399
(1992) 174 CLR 509
(1936) 55 CLR 499