Ilich v The Queen [1987] HCA 1

High Court of Australia Gibbs C.J. Wilson, Brennan, Deane and Dawson JJ. Ilich v The Queen [1987] HCA 1

ORDER Extension of time for making application for special leave granted. Application for special leave to appeal granted. Appeal allowed. Order that the judgment and order of the Court of Criminal Appeal of the Supreme Court of Western Australia be set aside. In lieu thereof allow the appeal to that Court, quash the conviction and sentence and order that a verdict and judgment of acquittal be entered.

Cur. adv. vult.

The following written judgments were delivered:

1987, Feb. 3 Gibbs C.J.

After a trial in the District Court of Western Australia the applicant was convicted on a charge that on 24 September 1984 at Bridgetown he stole the sum of $600 in money the property of one Peter Glen Brighton. An appeal to the Court of Criminal Appeal of Western Australia was dismissed. He now seeks special leave to appeal to this Court.

Shortly stated, the facts of the case were as follows. The applicant, a veterinary surgeon, had been acting as a locum tenens for Mr. Brighton in the latter's practice at Bridgetown. Mr. Brighton returned to Bridgetown on the evening of 23 September, and on the following afternoon he discussed with the applicant the amount that was owing to the latter for his services. There seems no room to doubt that Mr. Brighton was upset and agitated during this conversation — he said that this was because he found the house and clinic, which the applicant had been occupying, in a chaotic state; the applicant, on the other hand, endeavoured to elicit in evidence that Mr. Brighton's agitation was due to some matrimonial difficulties, but the learned trial judge disallowed questions put for that purpose. The applicant and Mr. Brighton gave conflicting versions as to what occurred on the afternoon of 24 September. It was common ground that the applicant signed an acknowledgment that he had received $1,176 from Mr. Brighton for "locum veterinary work and all incidental costs". Mr. Brighton said that this sum was agreed upon in discussions and that he then handed $1,176 in notes to the applicant who counted the notes and signed the receipt. He said that after he made the payment he had some money remaining, some of which, amounting to $600, he placed in a Telecom envelope which he left on the table. The telephone then rang and he left the room to answer it and after that walked outside to say goodbye to the applicant, who had by that time gone to his vehicle. When he returned to the room he found that the $600 was missing from the envelope, and that some papers were missing. That evening he telephoned the police. Two days later the missing papers were found at his clinic.