Saul Holt KC
Contact
Professional History
Saul Holt KC is a trial and appellate silk practising across public and administrative law, regulatory and work health and safety prosecutions, criminal law, resources law, planning and environment law, and constitutional law. He took silk in 2012 and appears for corporations, government, regulators and individuals — for prosecution and defence, applicants and respondents alike.
He is the sole barrister ranked “Market Leader” for Queensland criminal law in Doyle’s Guide and is consistently ranked among Australia’s preeminent criminal silks. He appears in the High Court of Australia, the Federal Court and across the appellate and trial courts of Queensland, Victoria and beyond, and is also ranked as a leading planning and environment barrister in Queensland.
His practice runs from the State’s most significant criminal trials and appeals, to multi-week resources and environmental hearings in the Land Court and Planning and Environment Court, to high-stakes regulatory and WHS prosecutions, to royal commissions and boards of inquiry. He holds a Master’s degree with first class honours in public law.
Before coming to the Bar, Saul was Chief Counsel at Victoria Legal Aid and a Victorian Law Reform Commissioner. As a Senior Policy Officer in the Victorian Department of Justice he was involved in the development of the Criminal Procedure Act 2009 (Vic), and he previously held Crown Prosecutor and Senior Crown Counsel positions in New Zealand.
Practice Areas
Saul is available to be briefed for advice or appearance work in the following areas:
- Public & administrative law
- Regulatory & WHS prosecutions
- Criminal law
- Resources law
- Planning & environment law
- Constitutional law
Rankings & Recognition
- Criminal Law Senior Counsel — Queensland: ranked “Market Leader” (the sole listing in the top band), Doyle’s Guide 2025 — the leading criminal silk in the State for a number of consecutive years.
- Criminal Law Senior Counsel — Australia: ranked among the preeminent criminal silks nationally, Doyle’s Guide (2022, 2023, 2024).
- Planning & Environment Barristers — Queensland: ranked as a leading planning and environment barrister, Doyle’s Guide (2025, 2026).
Recent & Significant Cases
High Court of Australia
- MDP v The King (2025) 99 ALJR 969; [2025] HCA 24 — for the appellant; landmark decision on the “materiality” threshold and the common form criminal appeal provisions
- BDO v The Queen [2023] HCA 16 — doli incapax and its application to s 29 of the Criminal Code (Qld)
- GBF v The Queen [2020] HCA 40 — right to silence; conviction quashed and retrial ordered
- Fennell v The Queen [2019] HCA 37 — for the appellant; murder conviction quashed and a verdict of acquittal entered in a wholly circumstantial case
- Koani v The Queen (2017) 263 CLR 427; [2017] HCA 42 — the act causing death must be willed and coincide with the intent to kill; appeal allowed and a retrial ordered
Constitutional, Human Rights & Anti-Discrimination
- Faruqi v Hanson [2024] FCA 1264 — led for the successful applicant; s 18C Racial Discrimination Act and a constitutional challenge to the validity of the racial hatred provisions (implied freedom of political communication)
- Athwal v State of Queensland [2022] QSC 209 — Racial Discrimination Act s 10 and s 109 of the Constitution — the wearing of the Sikh kirpan in schools (provision later declared invalid on appeal: [2023] QCA 156)
Counsel in the leading Victorian Charter authorities on the s 32 interpretive obligation — still regularly cited today:
- Victorian Toll & Anor v Taha & Anor; State of Victoria v Brookes & Anor [2013] VSCA 37; (2013) 49 VR 1 — (and at first instance, Taha v Broadmeadows Magistrates’ Court [2011] VSC 642) — the duty to inquire into special circumstances before imprisoning a person for fine default; rights to equality, liberty and a fair hearing
- Slaveski v Smith & Anor [2012] VSCA 25 — the scope and limits of the s 32(1) Charter interpretive obligation
Court of Appeal of Queensland – Criminal Appeals
Saul appears in many criminal appeals in the Court of Appeal each year. Recent matters include:
- 2025–26: R v Nguyen [2026] QCA 38; R v OAQ [2026] QCA 65; R v DCQ [2025] QCA 146; R v Green [2025] QCA 148; R v Sturgess [2025] QCA 150; R v Shabanzadeh [2025] QCA 92; R v Brennan; R v Sipple [2025] QCA 57; R v Rodriguez [2025] QCA 34
- 2024: R v Muller [2024] QCA 261; R v Bosscher [2024] QCA 253; R v Thompson [2024] QCA 233; R v Liu [2024] QCA 58; R v Nuske [2024] QCA 28
- 2023: R v BEE [2023] QCA 261; R v Kulatunge [2023] QCA 252; R v Baggaley [2023] QCA 249; R v RBJ [2023] QCA 124; R v BDO [2023] QCA 114; R v Ngakyunkwokka [2023] QCA 85; R v SDY [2023] QCA 28
- 2022: R v Deen [2022] QCA 274; R v TAV [2022] QCA 271; R v CCX [2022] QCA 260; R v Silcock [2022] QCA 234; R v WBU [2022] QCA 236; R v Koko [2022] QCA 216; R v Han [2022] QCA 199
His Court of Appeal practice also extends across civil, administrative and resources appeals, including TRG v The Board of Trustees of the Brisbane Grammar School [2020] QCA 190, Goondiwindi Regional Council v Tait [2020] QCA 119, Armitage v Parole Board Queensland [2023] QCA 239 and Pembroke Olive Downs Pty Ltd v Namrog Investments Pty Ltd [2025] QCA 87.
He also appears in the Supreme Court’s judicial review and public law jurisdiction, including Smith v Chief Executive, Queensland Corrective Services [2024] QSC 288.
Resources, Mining and the Land Court
- Waratah Coal Pty Ltd v Youth Verdict Ltd & Ors (No 6) [2022] QLC 21 — for the successful objectors; the first Australian decision to recommend refusal of a coal mine on climate change and human rights grounds
- New Acland Coal Pty Ltd v Smith & Ors [2018] QSC 88 — Supreme Court of Queensland — judicial review in the New Acland litigation
- Pembroke Olive Downs Pty Ltd v Sunland Cattle Co Pty Ltd & Ors [2020] QLC 27 — major coal mine objections hearing
- New Acland Coal Pty Ltd v Ashman & Ors (No 4) [2017] QLC 24
- Adani Mining Pty Ltd v Land Services of Coast and Country Inc & Ors [2015] QLC 48
Planning & Environment Court of Queensland
- Austin BMI Pty Ltd v Ipswich City Council & Ors [2023] QPEC 27 — development appeal for a major landfill and resource recovery facility, Swanbank / New Chum
- NuGrow Ipswich Pty Ltd v Chief Executive, Department of Environment and Science [2023] QPEC 45 — Swanbank composting / odour litigation
- Council of the City of Gold Coast v Gold Coast Leisure Services Pty Ltd & Anor [2024] QPEC 10; (No 2) [2024] QPEC 16 — the Gold Coast Helitours heliport proceedings
- Rivermakers Pty Ltd v Brisbane City Council & Ors [2026] QPEC 11
Regulatory & Professional Discipline
- Australian Society of Otolaryngology Head and Neck Surgery Ltd v Australian Health Practitioner Regulation Agency [2024] FCA 995 — the use of specialist titles in medical advertising under the Health Practitioner Regulation National Law
- Jorgensen v Fair Work Ombudsman [2019] FCAFC 113 — Full Court; contempt of freezing orders in Fair Work enforcement proceedings — appeal allowed in part and remitted
- Registrar of the Federal Court of Australia v Mensink [2021] FCA 1152 — contempt of court proceedings
Environmental & Administrative Law (Federal)
- Australian Conservation Foundation Inc v Minister for the Environment [2016] FCA 1042; (No 2) [2016] FCA 1095 — EPBC challenge to the Carmichael (Adani) coal mine approval
- Australian Conservation Foundation Inc v Minister for the Environment and Energy [2017] FCAFC 134 — Full Federal Court (on appeal)
- Humane Society International (Australia) Inc v Department of Agriculture & Fisheries (Qld) [2019] AATA 617
Commissions of Inquiry & Royal Commissions
Including:
- Senior Counsel for Victoria Police in the ‘Lawyer X’ Royal Commission (Royal Commission into the Management of Police Informants).
- Senior Counsel for Anglo American in the Queensland Coal Mining Board of Inquiry.
- Senior Counsel for affected families in the Grantham Floods Commission of Inquiry.
Selected Writing
- Holt & Hedge, “How Brawn v The King and MDP v The King Changed the Law on the Common Form Appeal Provisions” (Hearsay, Bar Association of Queensland, 2025; (2026) 3 QLJ 1).
- Holt & McGrath, “Climate Change Litigation: is the common law up to the task?” Auckland University Law Review.
- General Editor, Butler & Holt, Indictable Offences Queensland (Thomson Reuters).