R v IG [2019] NSWChC 7

R v IG [2019] NSWChC 7

Section 80(AG)(2) refers to the defence being raised in "any criminal proceedings". These proceedings, although commenced before the commencement of s 80(AG), were still extant criminal proceedings. Any ambiguity created by the absence of transitional or savings provisions and by s 30 of the Interpretation Act 1987 was to be resolved beneficially for the accused young person, particularly because the defence conferred a benefit and reflected the legislative purpose of reducing criminalisation of children. The defence therefore applied in the matter.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
25 September 2019
Procedural Posture
Criminal / Procedural Ruling on Whether the Defence of Similar Age Under S 80(ag) Applies Retrospectively
Outcome
The defence under s 80(AG) was found to apply in this matter and to operate retrospectively.
Legal Topics
['defence of Similar Age' 'retrospective Application of Amending Legislation' 'presumption Against Retrospectivity' 'child Sexual Abuse Offences']
['criminal Law' 'young Persons' 'statutory Interpretation'] ['defence of Similar Age' 'retrospective Application of Amending Legislation' 'presumption Against Retrospectivity' 'child Sexual Abuse Offences']

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 / Procedural Ruling on Whether the Defence of Similar Age Under S 80(ag) Applies Retrospectively

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the defence of similar age under s 80(AG), commenced on 1 December 2018, applied to criminal proceedings commenced before that date but still extant.' 'Whether any ambiguity about retrospective application should be resolved beneficially for the accused young person.']

Ratio Decidendi

Section 80(AG)(2) refers to the defence being raised in "any criminal proceedings". These proceedings, although commenced before the commencement of s 80(AG), were still extant criminal proceedings. Any ambiguity created by the absence of transitional or savings provisions and by s 30 of the Interpretation Act 1987 was to be resolved beneficially for the accused young person, particularly because the defence conferred a benefit and reflected the legislative purpose of reducing criminalisation of children. The defence therefore applied in the matter.

Court Disposition

The defence under s 80(AG) was found to apply in this matter and to operate retrospectively.

Orders

  • ['The defence raised by s 80(AG) and relied upon by the Young Person applies in this matter.']