NSW Caselaw
Court of Criminal Appeal Supreme Court New South Wales Medium Neutral Citation: AKB v R [2024] NSWCCA 169 Hearing dates: 22 September 2023 Date of orders: 6 September 2024 Decision date: 06 September 2024 Before: Gleeson JA at [1] Walton J at [113] Dhanji J at [114] Decision: (1) Grant leave to appeal, including an extension of time. (2) Appeal dismissed. Catchwords: CRIME – appeals – appeal against conviction –murder – death by thermal injury – where Crown relied on alternative acts causing death – extent to which jury unanimity required – where standard unanimity direction given – where direction given with respect to alternative intentional acts causing death – whether failure to direct jury as to requirement of unanimity as to specific act causing death Legislation Cited: Children (Criminal Proceedings) Act 1987 (NSW), s 15A Court Suppression and Non-Publication Orders Act 2010 (NSW), ss 7, 8(1)(e) Crimes Act 1900 (NSW), s 18 Criminal Appeal Act 1912 (NSW), s 5(1)(a) Supreme Court (Criminal Appeal) Rules 2021 (NSW), r 4.15 Cases Cited: Chapman v The Queen [2013] NSWCCA 91; (2013) 232 A Crim R 500 Country Care Group Pty Ltd v Director of Public Prosecutions (Cth) (2020) 275 FCR 342; [2020] FCAFC 30 Fermanis v The State of Western Australia (2007) 33 WAR 434; [2007] WASCA 84 Hamilton (a pseudonym) v The Queen [2021] HCA 33; (2021) 290 A Crim R 570 Johnson v Miller (1937) 59 CLR 467; [1937] HCA 77 Lane v R (2013) 241 A Crim R 321; [2013] NSWCCA 317 Lane v R [2017] NSWCCA 46 Lane v The Queen (2018) 265 CLR 196; [2018] HCA 28 Magnus v R (2013) 41 VR 612; [2013] VSCA 163 Pratten v R [2014] NSWCCA 117 Question of Law Reserved No 1 of 2022 [2023] SASCA 109 Ribbon v The Queen (2019) 134 SASR 328; [2019] SASCFC 130 R v AKB (No 8) [2018] NSWSC 1628 R v Boreman [2000] 1 All ER 307 R v Brown (1984) 79 Cr App R 115 R v Cramp [1999] NSWCCA 324; (1999) 110 A Crim R 198 R v Heaney (2009) 22 VR 164; (2009) 194 A Crim R 562 R v Klamo (2008) 18 VR 64; [2008] VSCA 75 R v McCarthy (2015) 124 SASR 190; [2015] SASCFC 177 R v Mead [2002] 1 NZLR 594 R v More (1988) 86 Cr App R 234 R v Walsh [2002] VSCA 98; (2002) 131 A Crim R 299 Shepherd v The Queen (1990) 170 CLR 573; [1990] HCA 56 S v The Queen (1989) 168 CLR 266; [1989] HCA 66 Zandipour v The Queen (2017) 53 VR 256; [2017] VSCA 179 Category: Principal judgment Parties: AKB (Applicant) Crown (Respondent) Representation: Counsel: T F Woods (Applicant) E Balodis (Respondent)
We try to embed the page this law was scraped from. If the site blocks framing, you still get the link and a local excerpt.
Last checked with source on —
Checking whether the official page can be embedded…
Plain-English simplify of this law: a short summary, key points, and both sides of the argument. Generated on first view via Replicate, then cached. Vote on what helps your study.
No study brief is cached for this law yet. Sign up to generate a plain-English brief.
Sign up to generate