NSW Caselaw
Reported Decision: 184 A Crim R 304
New South Wales Court of Criminal Appeal
CITATION: KING v REGINA [2008] NSWCCA 101
HEARING DATE(S): 6 March 2008
JUDGMENT DATE: 13 May 2008
JUDGMENT OF: Mason P at 1; Simpson J at 95; Latham J at 96
DECISION: Appeal dismissed.
CATCHWORDS: CRIMINAL LAW – Jurisdiction, practice and procedure – summing up – whether failure to properly identify issues to the jury – whether failure to properly put defence case to jury – where defence case confusing or not an answer to crown case - CRIMINAL LAW – Particular offences – property offences false pretences and other frauds and impositions – obtaining loan from a bank – where loan documents identify 144 specific buses – where the specific buses do not exist – where defendant knows the specific buses do not exist – where other buses exist
LEGISLATION CITED: Crimes Act 1900
CATEGORY: Principal judgment
Basto v The Queen (1954) 91 CLR 628 Domican v The Queen (1992) 173 CLR 555 Donald (1983) 11 A Crim R 47 Kastratovic (1985) 19 A Crim R 28 CASES CITED : Patten v Thomas Motors Pty Ltd (1965) 66 SR(NSW) 458 Peters v The Queen [1987] HCA 7, 192 CLR 493 R v Lawrence (1980) 32 ALR 72 R v Negline, NSWCCA, Hunt, Enderby, Loveday JJ, 5 December 1990 R v Smart [1963] NSWR 706 Spies v The Queen [2000] HCA 43, 201 CLR 603
PARTIES: Anthony Patrick King v Regina
FILE NUMBER(S): CCA 2007/2796
COUNSEL: P Davis SC (Applicant) G Rowling (Crown)
SOLICITORS: Ryan & Bosscher S Kavanagh - Solicitor for Public Prosecutions
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