Scaysbrook v R [2022] NSWCCA 69

Court of Criminal Appeal Supreme Court New South Wales Medium Neutral Citation: Scaysbrook v R [2022] NSWCCA 69 Hearing dates: 25 March 2022 Date of orders: 1 April 2022 Decision date: 01 April 2022 Before: Bellew J at [1] Lonergan J at [153] Ierace J at [154] Decision: (1) Leave in respect of grounds 1 and 2 is granted. (2) Leave in respect of ground 4 is refused. (3) The appeal is dismissed. Catchwords: CRIMINAL LAW – Application for leave to appeal against conviction – Where the applicant was found guilty by a jury of recklessly inflicting grievous bodily harm following an incident with police at a random breath testing station – Whether there was a failure on the part of the Crown to put its case to the applicant when cross-examining him – Consideration of the application of the rule in Browne v Dunn – Where the applicant was clearly on notice of the case against him – Whether the rule necessitated the Crown putting specific propositions in cross-examination – Whether it was open to the jury to find the Crown case established beyond reasonable doubt CRIMINAL LAW – Application for leave to appeal against conviction – Where grounds of appeal asserted that the trial judge had misdirected the jury in relation to a complaint of injury said to have been made by the applicant and in relation to the fact that the police witnesses had read their statements when giving evidence in chief – Where no issue had been taken by counsel at trial – Application of r 4.15 of the Supreme Court (Criminal Appeal) Rules 2021 (NSW) – Directions entirely appropriate in light of submissions which had been made by counsel in his closing address to the jury – Leave to rely on those grounds refused – Appeal dismissed Legislation Cited: Crimes Act 1900 (NSW) Evidence Act 1995 (NSW) Law Enforcement (Powers and Responsibilities) Act NSW (2002) Cases Cited: Allied Pastoral Holdings Pty Limited v The Commissioner of Taxation [1983] 1 NSWLR 1 Aravena v R (2015) 91 NSWLR 258; [2015] NSWCCA 288 Browne v Dunn (1893) 6 R 67 Greenhalgh v R [2017] NSWCCA 94 Libke v The Queen (2007) 230 CLR 559; [2007] HCA 30 M v The Queen (1994) 181 CLR 487; [1994] HCA 63 Masterton Homes Pty Ltd v Palm Assets Pty Ltd [2009] NSWCA 234; (2009) 261 ALR 382 MFA v The Queen (2002) 213 CLR 606; [2002] HCA 53 Pell v The Queen (2020) 268 CLR 123; [2020] HCA 12 Pratten v R [2021] NSWCCA 25 R v Birks (1990) 19 NSWLR 677 Seymour v The Australian Broadcasting Commission (1977) 19 NSWLR 219 SKA v The Queen (2011) 243 CLR 400; [2011] HCA 13 Spencer v Bamber [2012] NSWCA 274 The Queen v Baden-Clay (2016) 258 CLR 308; [2016] HCA 35 Trevascus v R (2021) 104 NSWLR 571; [2021] NSWCCA 104 Category: Principal judgment Parties: Grant Thomas Scaysbrook – Applicant Regina – Respondent Representation: Counsel: J Cohen – Applicant C Curtis – Respondent