Burnard v R, R v Burnard [2009] NSWCCA 5

Burnard v R, R v Burnard [2009] NSWCCA 5

It was open to the jury to be satisfied that Mr Burnard falsely held himself out as a director of an existing bank, with intent to gain a financial advantage, and knew that no such entity existed; no error in admitting evidence or in refusing directed verdicts arose. Although the trial judge erred in sentencing by failing to give proper effect to totality, the Court declined to intervene and alter the non-custodial sentences due to elapsed time, rehabilitation and double jeopardy considerations.

Parties
Appellant/respondent: Neil Austin Burnard; Respondent/appellant: Regina
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
10 February 2009
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Conviction and Crown Appeal Against Sentence
Outcome
Appeal against conviction dismissed; Crown appeal against sentence dismissed in exercise of the Court's discretion.
Legal Topics
False Statements, Sentencing, Appeal Procedure, Totality Principle, Suspended Sentences
Criminal Law False Statements Sentencing Appeal Procedure Totality Principle Suspended Sentences

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 5 Authorities cited 17 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Neil Austin Burnard

Appellant/respondent

Regina

Respondent/appellant

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Conviction and Crown Appeal Against Sentence

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether verdicts of guilty were unreasonable or unsupported by evidence under s 178BB of the Crimes Act
  2. 2 Whether the trial judge erred in law by not directing verdicts of acquittal
  3. 3 Whether evidence (including that of Mr Lewis) was wrongly admitted

Ratio Decidendi

It was open to the jury to be satisfied that Mr Burnard falsely held himself out as a director of an existing bank, with intent to gain a financial advantage, and knew that no such entity existed; no error in admitting evidence or in refusing directed verdicts arose. Although the trial judge erred in sentencing by failing to give proper effect to totality, the Court declined to intervene and alter the non-custodial sentences due to elapsed time, rehabilitation and double jeopardy considerations.

Court Disposition

Appeal against conviction dismissed; Crown appeal against sentence dismissed in exercise of the Court's discretion.

Orders

  • Appeal against conviction dismissed.
  • Crown appeal against sentence dismissed.