Phillips v The Queen [2006] HCA 4

HIGH COURT OF AUSTRALIA

GLEESON CJ,

GUMMOW, KIRBY, HAYNE AND HEYDON JJ

DANIEL CRIS PHILLIPS APPELLANT

AND

THE QUEEN RESPONDENT

Phillips v The Queen [2006] HCA 4

Date of Order: 9 December 2005

Date of Publication of Reasons: 1 March 2006

B58/2005

ORDER

1. Appeal allowed.

2. Set aside the orders of the Court of Appeal of the Supreme Court of Queensland made on 24 September 2004, and in place thereof order that:

(a) the appeal to that Court be allowed;

(b) the convictions in respect of counts 2, 4, 5, 6, 7 and 8 of the indictment are quashed; and

(c) there be retrials, conducted separately, on each of the following counts:

(i) count 2 for rape;

(ii) count 4 for rape;

(iii) count 5 for unlawful carnal knowledge;

(iv) count 6 for unlawful carnal knowledge and count 7 for rape; and

(v) count 8 for assault with intent to rape.

On appeal from the Supreme Court of Queensland

Representation:

A J Glynn SC with J D Henry for the appellant (instructed by Robertson O'Gorman)

L J Clare with S G Bain for the respondent (instructed by Director of Public Prosecutions (Queensland))

Notice: This copy of the Court's Reasons for Judgment is subject to formal revision prior to publication in the Commonwealth Law Reports.

CATCHWORDS

Phillips v The Queen

Criminal Law – Information, indictment or presentment – Joinder of counts – Criminal Code (Q), ss 567, 597A – Series of offences of same or similar character – Whether admission of evidence of each complainant in relation to all counts prejudicial to appellant such that separate trials should have been ordered.

Criminal Law – Evidence – Admissibility of similar fact evidence – Appellant charged with eight counts of sexual offences against six complainants –Whether evidence in relation to counts involving one complainant admissible in relation to counts involving other complainants – Whether similar fact evidence admissible on the issue of consent – Whether similar fact evidence admissible on issues other than consent – Application of principles for admissibility of similar fact evidence stated in Pfennig v The Queen (1995) 182 CLR 461 – Whether similar fact evidence has strong degree of probative force sufficient to outweigh prejudicial effect.