R v Alex & Ors (Trial Ruling No 4) [2024] NSWSC 1129

R v Alex & Ors (Trial Ruling No 4) [2024] NSWSC 1129

The evidence adduced by the Crown was only capable, at its highest, of establishing two separate conspiracies: one in relation to non-remittance of PAYG withholding in connection with the GHRC/CPC business, and another, distinct, conspiracy in relation to Superform (Queensland) Pty Ltd. Accordingly, count 1 could only be left to the jury with respect to the GHRC/CPC conspiracy, and the Superform aspect must be excluded. Since there was no evidence Arthur Alex agreed to the GHRC/CPC conspiracy or handled its proceeds, directed verdicts of not guilty must be entered for him on counts 1 and 2.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
05 June 2024
Procedural Posture
Criminal Trial / Trial Ruling (after Crown Case Closed)
Outcome
Directed verdicts of not guilty entered for Arthur Alex on counts 1 and 2; Crown case on count 1 confined to GHRC/CPC conspiracy only; exclusion of Superform matters from jury consideration.
Legal Topics
['conspiracy to Defraud Commonwealth' 'latent Duplicity' 'directed Verdicts' 'payg Tax Fraud']
['criminal Law' 'criminal Procedure'] ['conspiracy to Defraud Commonwealth' 'latent Duplicity' 'directed Verdicts' 'payg Tax Fraud']

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 1 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Procedural Posture

Criminal Trial / Trial Ruling (after Crown Case Closed)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether count 1 pleads one conspiracy or multiple conspiracies and thus is bad for duplicity' 'Whether the evidence can support a finding of a general conspiracy as pleaded or only two distinct conspiracies' 'Whether Arthur Alex can be found guilty on counts 1 and 2 based on available evidence or is entitled to directed acquittal']

Ratio Decidendi

The evidence adduced by the Crown was only capable, at its highest, of establishing two separate conspiracies: one in relation to non-remittance of PAYG withholding in connection with the GHRC/CPC business, and another, distinct, conspiracy in relation to Superform (Queensland) Pty Ltd. Accordingly, count 1 could only be left to the jury with respect to the GHRC/CPC conspiracy, and the Superform aspect must be excluded. Since there was no evidence Arthur Alex agreed to the GHRC/CPC conspiracy or handled its proceeds, directed verdicts of not guilty must be entered for him on counts 1 and 2.

Court Disposition

Directed verdicts of not guilty entered for Arthur Alex on counts 1 and 2; Crown case on count 1 confined to GHRC/CPC conspiracy only; exclusion of Superform matters from jury consideration.

Orders

  • ['Crown may only seek verdicts of guilty on count 1 in respect of conspiracy to cause non-remittance of PAYG relating to GHRC and CPC business.' 'Jury is to be directed to disregard evidence regarding Superform.' 'Directed verdicts of not guilty for Arthur Alex entered on counts 1 and 2.']