HCF v. The Queen

Case No.

B50/2022

Case Information

Lower Court Judgment

03/09/2021 Supreme Court of Queensland (Court of Appeal) (Morrison & Mullins JJA, North J)

[2021] QCA 189

Catchwords

Criminal practice – Miscarriage of justice – Application of proviso that no substantial miscarriage of justice actually occurred – Criminal Code (Qld), s 668E(1) – Jury misconduct – Independent research – Where jury disobeyed trial judge's directions that: (1) prohibited independent research; and (2) required discovery by other jurors of any such misconduct – Where sheriff investigated juror misconduct pursuant to s 70(7) of Jury At 1995 (Qld) and produced report provided to parties before appeal heard – Whether substantial miscarriage of justice occasioned by proven disobedience by jurors of trial judge's direction – Whether verdicts of guilty were true for whole jury in circumstances where only five of twelve jurors responded to sheriff's investigation – Whether proviso applies where jury fails to obey judicial directions. 

Documents*

14/10/2022 Hearing (SLA, Canberra by video connection)

28/10/2022 Notice of appeal

02/12/2022 Written submissions (Appellant)

02/12/2022 Chronology (Appellant)

13/01/2023 Written submissions (Respondent)

14/04/2023 Hearing (Full Court, Canberra) (Audio-visual recording)

13/04/2023 Outline of oral argument (Appellant)

14/04/2023 Outline of oral argument (Respondent)

02/06/2023 Supplementary written submissions (Appellant)

02/06/2023 Supplementary written submissions (Respondent)

15/11/2023 Judgment (Judgment summary)

 

Audio-visual recordings of Full Court hearings heard in Canberra

Case: Davis v. Minister for Immigration, Citizenship, Migrant Services and Multicultural Affairs & Ors; DCM20 v. Secretary of Department of Home Affairs & Anor

Date: 20 October 2022

Transcript: Hearing

AV time:  3h 47m

 

You accept the terms of use (below) by playing this audio-visual recording.

 

Terms of use

Access to the audio-visual recordings of the Court is subject to the following conditions:

(1) You will not record, copy, modify, reproduce, publish, republish, upload, post, transmit, broadcast, rebroadcast, store, distribute or otherwise make available, in any manner, any proceeding or part of any proceeding, other than with prior written approval of the Court.  However, schools and universities may broadcast/rebroadcast proceedings in a classroom setting for educational purposes without prior written approval.

(2) The audio-visual material available via our web-site of Court proceedings does not constitute the official record of the Court.

(3) Copyright of the footage of the proceedings is retained by the Court.

By clicking "play" (the triangle controls on the video player), you agree to be bound by these terms of use.

 

Audio-visual recordings of Full Court hearings heard in Canberra

Case: BRYANT & ORS AS LIQUIDATORS OF GUNNS LIMITED AND AUSPINE LIMITED V BADENOCH INTEGRATED LOGGING PTY LTD

Date: 18 October 2022

Transcript: Hearing

AV time:  4h 02m

 

You accept the terms of use (below) by playing this audio-visual recording.

 

Terms of use

Access to the audio-visual recordings of the Court is subject to the following conditions:

(1) You will not record, copy, modify, reproduce, publish, republish, upload, post, transmit, broadcast, rebroadcast, store, distribute or otherwise make available, in any manner, any proceeding or part of any proceeding, other than with prior written approval of the Court.  However, schools and universities may broadcast/rebroadcast proceedings in a classroom setting for educational purposes without prior written approval.

(2) The audio-visual material available via our web-site of Court proceedings does not constitute the official record of the Court.

(3) Copyright of the footage of the proceedings is retained by the Court.

By clicking "play" (the triangle controls on the video player), you agree to be bound by these terms of use.

 

Audio-visual recordings of Full Court hearings heard in Canberra

Case: SWEARING IN OF THE HONOURABLE JUSTICE JAYNE MARGARET JAGOT AS A JUSTICE OF THE HIGH COURT OF AUSTRALIA

Date: 17 October 2022

Transcript: Hearing

AV time:  0h 48m

 

You accept the terms of use (below) by playing this audio-visual recording.

 

Terms of use

Access to the audio-visual recordings of the Court is subject to the following conditions:

(1) You will not record, copy, modify, reproduce, publish, republish, upload, post, transmit, broadcast, rebroadcast, store, distribute or otherwise make available, in any manner, any proceeding or part of any proceeding, other than with prior written approval of the Court.  However, schools and universities may broadcast/rebroadcast proceedings in a classroom setting for educational purposes without prior written approval.

(2) The audio-visual material available via our web-site of Court proceedings does not constitute the official record of the Court.

(3) Copyright of the footage of the proceedings is retained by the Court.

By clicking "play" (the triangle controls on the video player), you agree to be bound by these terms of use.

 

Audio-visual recordings of Full Court hearings heard in Canberra

Case: Davis v. Minister for Immigration, Citizenship, Migrant Services and Multicultural Affairs & Ors; DCM20 v. Secretary of Department of Home Affairs & Anor

Date: 19 October 2022

Transcript: Hearing

AV time:  4h 44m

 

You accept the terms of use (below) by playing this audio-visual recording.

 

Terms of use

Access to the audio-visual recordings of the Court is subject to the following conditions:

(1) You will not record, copy, modify, reproduce, publish, republish, upload, post, transmit, broadcast, rebroadcast, store, distribute or otherwise make available, in any manner, any proceeding or part of any proceeding, other than with prior written approval of the Court.  However, schools and universities may broadcast/rebroadcast proceedings in a classroom setting for educational purposes without prior written approval.

(2) The audio-visual material available via our web-site of Court proceedings does not constitute the official record of the Court.

(3) Copyright of the footage of the proceedings is retained by the Court.

By clicking "play" (the triangle controls on the video player), you agree to be bound by these terms of use.

 

Page 53 of 277