High Court and NSW Criminal Law judgments

EvidenceEdge
  • 0.0 (0)
  • Business
  • Updated Daily

High Court and New South Wales Criminal Law Judgments is a series of short podcasts exploring recently published criminal decisions from the NSW Supreme Court, Court of Criminal Appeal, and the District Court. Criminal matters adjudicated by the High Court of Australia are also included. Each episode is a spoken case note on a single judgment: the facts the Court accepted, the issues decided, the orders made, and why the reasoning matters. It separates submissions from findings, ratio from obiter, and notes when earlier authority is distinguished or qualified — drawing only from the published reasons. For barristers, solicitors, educators and students, as well as informed listeners who want a clear path through a judgment. Not legal advice; not a substitute for reading the full case. Listeners are encouraged to read the official published judgment. Disclaimer This podcast discusses High Court of Australia and NSW judgments. It is not legal advice and not an official judgment. Commentary is not sponsored or endorsed by the High Court of Australia or the NSW Courts stated, and must not be presented as an official version of any judgment, or as affiliated with or endorsed by those Courts. We keep the material accurate, respect suppression and publication restrictions. For High Court decisions, we attribute and thank the High Court of Australia as the source and indicate that any summary is based on the original version available on the Court’s website at https://www.hcourt.gov.au/. For NSW decisions, we cite NSW Caselaw as the source. For the authoritative text, go to https://www.caselaw.nsw.gov.au/.

  1. 1d ago

    R v Baziad (No 3) [2026] NSWSC 1038

    R v Baziad (No 3) [2026] NSWSC 1038. Boulten J sentenced Gofal Baziad for the 2004 murder of Jason Palmer, committed amid a love triangle. Baziad attacked Palmer with a glass object and knife, concealed and disposed of his body, fled Australia and continued denying responsibility. The key sentencing issues were the facts proved in the circumstantial case, objective seriousness, whether life imprisonment was required, and the effect of the long delay, age and low future risk. Planning was not proved, and the murder was assessed around mid-range seriousness. The Court imposed 24 years’ imprisonment, with an 18-year non-parole period commencing 17 June 2024.

    R v Baziad (No 3) [2026] NSWSC 1038

  2. 1d ago

    RS v Commissioner of Police (NSW) [2026] NSWCCA 128

    RS v Commissioner of Police (NSW) [2026] NSWCCA 128 concerned a subpoena for material relating to alleged sexual offending by the applicant’s son, RJ. RS faced Commonwealth charges over child abuse material found on his phone and proposed that RJ, who allegedly had access to it, may have been responsible. The key issue was whether the subpoenaed material had a legitimate forensic purpose. The Court held that the primary judge mischaracterised RS’s proposed defence, overlooked relevant similarities and failed to give proper significance to earlier prosecutorial disclosure. Leave to appeal was granted, the appeal allowed, the Commissioner’s motion dismissed and production ordered.

    RS v Commissioner of Police (NSW) [2026] NSWCCA 128

  3. 1d ago

    R v Lui (Sentence Judgment) [2026] NSWSC 965

    R v Lui (Sentence Judgment) [2026] NSWSC 965 concerns Pei Lui’s sentence for the manslaughter of Tao Cheng following a prolonged, fatal assault in a Sydney CBD stairwell. After a jury acquitted Lui of murder, the key issue was whether the Court could find beyond reasonable doubt that he alone inflicted the violence without contradicting that verdict. McNaughton J held it could: intoxication left open reasonable doubt about murderous intent. The attack was extremely serious, random and vicious, although Lui’s profound childhood disadvantage reduced his moral culpability. After a 25% discount for an early manslaughter plea offer, he received 10 years and 6 months, with a 7-year non-parole period.

    R v Lui (Sentence Judgment) [2026] NSWSC 965

  4. 6d ago

    R v Graham [2026] NSWSC 1017

    R v Graham [2026] NSWSC 1017 concerns Jo-Ann Graham’s killing of her friend Diedre Anne Folpp by repeated stabbing in October 2023. In a hearing under s 31 of the Mental Health and Cognitive Impairment Forensic Provisions Act 2020 (NSW), the central issue was whether Graham’s acute psychosis meant she was not criminally responsible, despite possible contributions from substance use. Lonergan J found that she had schizophrenia with substance use disorder, that her impairment was not caused solely by drugs or intoxication, and that she could not reason about the act’s wrongfulness. The Court entered a special verdict of “act proven but not criminally responsible” and ordered her detention.

    R v Graham [2026] NSWSC 1017

  5. Aug 25

    SafeWork NSW v SMB Car Transport Employment Pty Ltd; SafeWork NSW v SMB Australia Car Transport Pty Ltd; SafeWork NSW v Mytkowski (No. 2) [2026] NSWDC 308

    SafeWork NSW v SMB Car Transport Employment Pty Ltd; SafeWork NSW v SMB Australia Car Transport Pty Ltd; SafeWork NSW v Mytkowski (No. 2) [2026] NSWDC 308 concerns sentencing related companies and their director for WHS offences after a damaged 800-kilogram gate fell on an employee, causing serious permanent injuries. The key issue was each offender’s culpability, including whether the employment company bore less responsibility because another company controlled the premises and gates. The Court held the duties were concurrent and non-transferable, assessed the offending as mid-range, and rejected reduced-capacity-to-pay and section 10 arguments. Each company was convicted and fined $180,000; Mytkowski was convicted and fined $15,000 and $45,000.

    SafeWork NSW v SMB Car Transport Employment Pty Ltd; SafeWork NSW v SMB Australia Car Transport Pty Ltd; SafeWork NSW v Mytkowski (No. 2) [2026] NSWDC 308

  6. Aug 25

    SafeWork NSW v ANJ Container Services & Bond Stores Pty Ltd (No. 2) [2026] NSWDC 307

    SafeWork NSW v ANJ Container Services & Bond Stores Pty Ltd (No. 2) [2026] NSWDC 307. Following conviction, the Court sentenced ANJ for exposing Darren Spinks to a risk of death or serious injury under the Work Health and Safety Act 2011, after he was fatally struck by a reversing reach stacker. The key issue was the seriousness of ANJ’s breach, including whether a worker’s momentary driving error reduced the company’s responsibility for systemic safety failures. The Court found high culpability and fined ANJ $800,000, with half payable to SafeWork. ANJ generally had to pay the prosecutor’s costs, but SafeWork had to pay costs caused by its subpoena non-compliance.

    SafeWork NSW v ANJ Container Services & Bond Stores Pty Ltd (No. 2) [2026] NSWDC 307

  7. Aug 21

    R v Delaney [2026] NSWSC 1003

    R v Delaney [2026] NSWSC 1003 concerned a s 31 hearing after the Court of Criminal Appeal quashed Lucas Delaney’s murder conviction. The Court found that Delaney killed his sister, Gabriella, by repeatedly striking her with a hammer. The key issue was whether his mental health impairment was excluded because drug ingestion triggered his psychosis. Dhanji J accepted that Delaney suffered from schizophrenia or schizoaffective disorder and did not know his act was wrong. As an underlying psychotic illness was also causally operative, intoxication was not the sole cause. The Court returned a special verdict of act proven but not criminally responsible, ordered detention and referred Delaney to the Mental Health Review Tribunal.

    R v Delaney [2026] NSWSC 1003

  8. Aug 21

    R v Hartcher [2026] NSWDC 306

    R v Hartcher [2026] NSWDC 306. Mahony SC DCJ sentenced Hartcher for three online child-procurement offences and eight child abuse material offences, with two further offences taken into account. The central issue was the appropriate aggregate sentence, balancing the high seriousness of the persistent, sexually motivated offending against Hartcher’s acquired brain injury, cognitive decline, advanced age, early guilty pleas and rehabilitation. The Court found the impairment somewhat reduced moral culpability and deterrent weight but did not excuse the prolonged conduct. After a 25% plea discount and application of totality, Hartcher received six years and six months’ imprisonment, with a three-year non-parole period. Forfeiture and registration orders followed.

    R v Hartcher [2026] NSWDC 306
See All (35)

About

High Court and New South Wales Criminal Law Judgments is a series of short podcasts exploring recently published criminal decisions from the NSW Supreme Court, Court of Criminal Appeal, and the District Court. Criminal matters adjudicated by the High Court of Australia are also included. Each episode is a spoken case note on a single judgment: the facts the Court accepted, the issues decided, the orders made, and why the reasoning matters. It separates submissions from findings, ratio from obiter, and notes when earlier authority is distinguished or qualified — drawing only from the published reasons. For barristers, solicitors, educators and students, as well as informed listeners who want a clear path through a judgment. Not legal advice; not a substitute for reading the full case. Listeners are encouraged to read the official published judgment. Disclaimer This podcast discusses High Court of Australia and NSW judgments. It is not legal advice and not an official judgment. Commentary is not sponsored or endorsed by the High Court of Australia or the NSW Courts stated, and must not be presented as an official version of any judgment, or as affiliated with or endorsed by those Courts. We keep the material accurate, respect suppression and publication restrictions. For High Court decisions, we attribute and thank the High Court of Australia as the source and indicate that any summary is based on the original version available on the Court’s website at https://www.hcourt.gov.au/. For NSW decisions, we cite NSW Caselaw as the source. For the authoritative text, go to https://www.caselaw.nsw.gov.au/.

Information