Taub v R [2017] NSWCCA 198

Court of Criminal Appeal Supreme Court New South Wales Medium Neutral Citation: Taub v R [2017] NSWCCA 198 Hearing dates: 10 February 2017 Decision date: 21 August 2017 Before: Simpson JA at [1], Walton J at [84], Button J at [85] Decision: (1) Appeal against conviction of manufacturing not less than the large commercial quantity of methylamphetamine allowed;

(2) The verdict of guilty of that offence be set aside;

(3) In lieu thereof, pursuant to s 7 of the Criminal Appeal Act 1912 (NSW), the appellant be convicted of manufacturing not less than the commercial quantity of methylamphetamine;

(4) Matter remitted to the District Court for sentencing for that offence. Catchwords: EVIDENCE – opinion evidence – exceptions to the opinion rule – expert opinion – proof of assumption rule – basis rule – whether assumptions underlying expert opinion must be proved for the opinion to be admissible

CRIME – manufacture large commercial quantity of prohibited drug – where only evidence of quantity of drug produced is expert opinion evidence – whether verdict unreasonable or unsupported by the evidence Legislation Cited: Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999 (NSW), Pt 4 Div 1A Criminal Appeal Act 1912 (NSW), ss 6, 7 Drug Misuse and Trafficking Act 1985 (NSW), ss 24, 30, 33 Evidence Act 1995 (NSW), ss 55, 56, 76, 79, 137, 177 Cases Cited: Australian Securities and Investments Commission v Rich (2005) 218 ALR 764; [2005] NSWCA 152 Dasreef Pty Ltd v Hawchar (2011) 243 CLR 588; [2011] HCA 21 Dickson v R [2017] NSWCCA 78 Kyluk Pty Ltd v Chief Executive, Office of Environment and Heritage (2013) 298 ALR 532; [2013] NSWCCA 114 Libke v The Queen (2007) 230 CLR 559; [2007] HCA 30 M v The Queen (1994) 181 CLR 487; [1994] HCA 63 Makita (Australia) Pty Ltd v Sprowles (2001) 52 NSWLR 705; [2001] NSWCA 305 MFA v The Queen (2002) 213 CLR 606; [2002] HCA 53 R v Fletcher (2005) 156 A Crim R 308; [2005] NSWCCA 338 SKA v The Queen (2011) 243 CLR 400; [2011] HCA 13 Category: Principal judgment Parties: Robert Taub (Appellant) Regina (Respondent) Representation: Counsel: K H Averre (Appellant) N J Adams (Respondent)