El-Badawi v R [2021] NSWCCA 196

El-Badawi v R [2021] NSWCCA 196

It was open to the jury to be satisfied beyond reasonable doubt that the applicant's act of shooting the complainant was not a reasonable response in the circumstances as he perceived them, negating self-defence or defence of another. Despite inconsistencies, the jury was entitled to prefer parts of the Crown case, and the verdict was not unreasonable or unsupported under the applicable appellate principles.

Parties
Applicant: Ahmed Mouner El-Badawi; Respondent Crown: Regina
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
20 August 2021
Procedural Posture
Criminal Conviction Appeal / Court of Criminal Appeal Determination on Leave and Merits
Outcome
Leave to appeal against conviction is granted; the appeal against conviction is dismissed.
Legal Topics
Conviction Appeal, Self Defence/defence of Another, Unreasonable Verdict, Intent to Cause Grievous Bodily Harm, Wounding With Firearm
Criminal Law Conviction Appeal Self Defence/defence of Another Unreasonable Verdict Intent to Cause Grievous Bodily Harm Wounding With Firearm

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 3 Authorities cited 12 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 6
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Ahmed Mouner El-Badawi

Applicant

Regina

Respondent Crown

Procedural Posture

Criminal Conviction Appeal / Court of Criminal Appeal Determination on Leave and Merits

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the verdict of the jury was unreasonable or cannot be supported having regard to the evidence
  2. 2 Whether there was a reasonable possibility that the applicant believed his conduct was necessary to defend his sister
  3. 3 Whether what the applicant did was a reasonable response in the circumstances as perceived by him

Ratio Decidendi

It was open to the jury to be satisfied beyond reasonable doubt that the applicant's act of shooting the complainant was not a reasonable response in the circumstances as he perceived them, negating self-defence or defence of another. Despite inconsistencies, the jury was entitled to prefer parts of the Crown case, and the verdict was not unreasonable or unsupported under the applicable appellate principles.

Court Disposition

Leave to appeal against conviction is granted; the appeal against conviction is dismissed.

Orders

  • Leave to appeal against conviction is granted.
  • The appeal against conviction is dismissed.