{ tooltip = 'Copied'; setTimeout(() => tooltip = 'Copy Link', 2000); })" :data-tip="tooltip" class="tooltip tooltip-primary tooltip-bottom" class="cursor-pointer" role="button">
Obeid v The Queen
Download as PDF
Download as Word
Highlights
My Notes
Collections
Create a New Collection
Overview
Full Text
{ tooltip = 'Copied'; setTimeout(() => tooltip = 'Copy Link', 2000); })" :data-tip="tooltip" class="tooltip tooltip-primary tooltip-bottom" class="cursor-pointer" role="button">
Details
Case
Agency Issuance Number
Published Date
Obeid v The Queen
[2016] HCA 9
Tags
No tags available
Case
Obeid v The Queen
[2016] HCA 9
•
HIGH COURT OF AUSTRALIAGAGELER JEDWARD MOSES OBEID APPLICANTANDTHE QUEEN RESPONDENTObeid v The Queen[2016] HCA 9Date of Order: 19 January 2016Date of Publication of Reasons: 4 April 2016S265/2015ORDERThe applicant's summons filed on 17 December 2015 be dismissed.RepresentationG O'L Reynolds SC with D P Hume for the applicant (instructed by Breene and Breene Solicitors)W J Abraham QC with S F Beckett for the respondent (instructed by Solicitor for Public Prosecutions (NSW))Notice: This copy of the Court's Reasons for Judgment is subject to formal revision prior to publication in the Commonwealth Law Reports.CATCHWORDSObeid v The QueenPractice and procedure – High Court of Australia – Appeal – Stay of proceeding – Application to stay criminal proceeding in Supreme Court of New South Wales pending determination of application for special leave to appeal – Applicant made interlocutory application before empanelment of jury in proceeding on indictment in Supreme Court to quash indictment or permanently stay proceeding – Application refused by single judge – Appeal dismissed by Court of Criminal Appeal – Application made for special leave to appeal – Whether criminal proceeding should be stayed pending determination of special leave application.High Court Rules 2004 (Cth), r 8.07.GAGELER J. This is a revised version of the reasons for decision delivered orally in open court on 19 January 2016 at the conclusion of a hearing on that day of an application for a stay of criminal proceedings pending the determination of an application for special leave to appeal. There being no urgency about the publication of the...
Continue reading the full case
Tags
No tags available
Case
Obeid v The Queen
[2016] HCA 9
•
HIGH COURT OF AUSTRALIAGAGELER JEDWARD MOSES OBEID APPLICANTANDTHE QUEEN RESPONDENTObeid v The Queen[2016] HCA 9Date of Order: 19 January 2016Date of Publication of Reasons: 4 April 2016S265/2015ORDERThe applicant's summons filed on 17 December 2015 be dismissed.RepresentationG O'L Reynolds SC with D P Hume for the applicant (instructed by Breene and Breene Solicitors)W J Abraham QC with S F Beckett for the respondent (instructed by Solicitor for Public Prosecutions (NSW))Notice: This copy of the Court's Reasons for Judgment is subject to formal revision prior to publication in the Commonwealth Law Reports.CATCHWORDSObeid v The QueenPractice and procedure – High Court of Australia – Appeal – Stay of proceeding – Application to stay criminal proceeding in Supreme Court of New South Wales pending determination of application for special leave to appeal – Applicant made interlocutory application before empanelment of jury in proceeding on indictment in Supreme Court to quash indictment or permanently stay proceeding – Application refused by single judge – Appeal dismissed by Court of Criminal Appeal – Application made for special leave to appeal – Whether criminal proceeding should be stayed pending determination of special leave application.High Court Rules 2004 (Cth), r 8.07.GAGELER J. This is a revised version of the reasons for decision delivered orally in open court on 19 January 2016 at the conclusion of a hearing on that day of an application for a stay of criminal proceedings pending the determination of an application for special leave to appeal. There being no urgency about the publication of the...
showFlash = false, 6000)"
>