Robertson v R [2024] NSWCCA 99

Court of Criminal Appeal Supreme Court New South Wales Medium Neutral Citation: Robertson v R [2024] NSWCCA 99 Hearing dates: 18 March 2024 Date of orders: 03 July 2024 Decision date: 03 July 2024 Before: Harrison CJ at CL at [1]; Cavanagh J at [35]; Dhanji J at [116] Decision: (1) Grant leave to appeal. (2) Allow the appeal. (3) Quash the conviction. (4) Order that there be a new trial. (5) Direct that the proceedings be listed for mention in the Supreme Court Arraignment List on 2 August 2024. Catchwords: CRIME – appeals – failure to leave to the jury alternative verdict of manslaughter based on excessive self-defence in s 421 Crimes Act 1900 (NSW) – whether failure caused a miscarriage of justice – where applicant pleaded guilty to manslaughter and not guilty to murder in front of the jury – applicant convicted of murder as part of a joint or extended joint criminal enterprise – where no expert evidence proving which of the accused committed the act causing death – whether evidence capable of supporting an alternative verdict of manslaughter – whether evidence capable of supporting formation of a tacit agreement to act in concerted self-defence – whether failure to leave excessive self-defence caused substantial miscarriage of justice CRIME – appeals – statutory interpretation – excessive self-defence – meaning of "force that involves the infliction of death" in s 421 Crimes Act 1900 (NSW) – whether something less than a direct causal connection is required to raise the partial defence – whether distinction between the use of force that involves the infliction of death and force that causes death Legislation Cited: Crimes Act 1900 (NSW), ss 418, 421 Cases Cited: Batak v R [2024] NSWCCA 66 Beavan v The Queen (1954) 92 CLR 660; [1954] HCA 41 Clayton v The Queen [2006] HCA 58; 81 ALJR 439 Coskun v R [2024] NSWCCA 67 Gilbert v The Queen (2000) 201 CLR 414; [2000] HCA 15 Gillard v The Queen (2003) 219 CLR 1; [2003] HCA 64 Huynh v The Queen [2013] HCA 6; 87 ALJR 434 IL v The Queen (2017) 262 CLR 268; [2017] HCA 27 James v The Queen (2014) 253 CLR 475; [2014] HCA 6 Johns v The Queen (1980) 143 CLR 108; [1980] HCA 3 Lane v The Queen (2013) 241 A Crim R 321; [2013] NSWCCA 317 McAuliffe v The Queen (1995) 183 CLR 108; [1995] HCA 37 McEwan v R (2013) 41 VR 330; [2013] VSCA 329 Miller v The Queen (2016) 259 CLR 380; [2016] HCA 30 Mitchell v The King (2023) 276 CLR 299; [2023] HCA 5 Osland v The Queen (1998) 197 CLR 316; [1998] HCA 75 Pemble v The Queen (1971) 124 CLR 107; [1971] HCA 20 R v Basanovic (2018) 100 NSWLR 840; [2018] NSWCCA 246 R v Crane & Ors (Trial Ruling No 10) [2022] NSWSC 1227 R v King (2004) 59 NSWLR 515; [2004] NSWCCA 20 R v Tangye (1997) 92 A Crim R 545 The King v Rohan (a pseudonym) [2024] HCA 3; 98 ALJR 429 Zecivic v The Director of Public Prosecutions (Vic) (1987) 162 CLR 645; [1987] HCA 26 Category: Principal judgment Parties: Guy Keith Robertson (Applicant) Crown (Respondent) Representation: Counsel: I McLachlan (Applicant) M England with V Garrity (Respondent)