NSW Caselaw
Court of Criminal Appeal Supreme Court New South Wales Medium Neutral Citation: Youkhana v R [2015] NSWCCA 41 Hearing dates: 09 March 2015 Decision date: 27 March 2015 Before: Meagher JA at [1]; Schmidt J at [36]; Bellew J at [37] Decision: Application for leave to appeal dismissed Catchwords: CRIMINAL LAW – conviction appeal – robbery – Crimes Act 1900 (NSW), s 97 – joint criminal enterprise – whether primary judge erred in direction on joint criminal enterprise – 'participation' required of member of joint enterprise present but not actively involved in the commission of agreed crime – whether jury ought to be directed that 'participation' requires more than proof that the accused was a party to an agreement and was present when agreed crime was committed Legislation Cited: Crimes Act 1900 (NSW), s 97(1) Criminal Appeal Rules, r 4 Cases Cited: Huynh v The Queen [2013] HCA 6; 87 ALJR 434 Libke v The Queen [2007] HCA 30; 230 CLR 559 M v The Queen [1994] HCA 63; 181 CLR 487 McAuliffe v The Queen [1995] HCA 37; 183 CLR 108 MFA v The Queen [2002] HCA 53; 213 CLR 606 Osland v the Queen [1998] HCA 75; 197 CLR 316 R v Chai [2002] HCA 12; 76 ALJR 628 R v Hillier [2007] HCA 13; 228 CLR 618 R v Tangye (1997) 92 A Crim R 545 SKA v The Queen [2011] HCA 13; 243 CLR 400 Category: Principal judgment Parties: Youbert Youkhana (Applicant) Regina (Crown) Representation: Counsel: S Pararajasingham (Applicant) J Pickering SC (Crown)
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