Crampton v The Queen [2000] HCA 60

Crampton v The Queen [2000] HCA 60

The conduct alleged and found proved against the appellant did not constitute an offence under s 81A of the Crimes Act 1900 (NSW) as properly construed; an act of indecency 'with' another male person requires participation or concerted action by the other male, not mere presence as a passive observer. The long delay in complaint required a mandatory Longman warning which was not properly given at trial. The High Court may, in exceptional circumstances like this, grant special leave to appeal and decide a point of law not raised below where the interests of justice so require, and where the outcome could not have been altered by further evidence at trial.

Parties
Appellant: Alan James Crampton; Respondent: The Queen; Intervener: Attorney-General of the Commonwealth; Intervener: Attorney-General for the State of South Australia
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
23 November 2000
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Final Appeal—high Court of Australia
Outcome
appeal allowed; conviction quashed; acquittal entered
Legal Topics
Jury Directions—longman Warning, Appeals—raising New Points on Appeal, Construction of Offences—'with' in Acts of Indecency, Appellate Jurisdiction of the High Court
Criminal Law Constitutional Law Jury Directions—longman Warning Appeals—raising New Points on Appeal Construction of Offences—'with' in Acts of Indecency Appellate Jurisdiction of the High Court

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 4 Authorities cited 22 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Alan James Crampton

Appellant

The Queen

Respondent

Attorney-General of the Commonwealth

Intervener

Attorney-General for the State of South Australia

Intervener

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Final Appeal—high Court of Australia

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the trial judge gave an adequate Longman warning regarding delay in complaint
  2. 2 Whether the conduct proved at trial constituted the offence under s 81A of the Crimes Act 1900 (NSW)
  3. 3 Whether the High Court may allow new grounds not raised below in a criminal appeal

Ratio Decidendi

The conduct alleged and found proved against the appellant did not constitute an offence under s 81A of the Crimes Act 1900 (NSW) as properly construed; an act of indecency 'with' another male person requires participation or concerted action by the other male, not mere presence as a passive observer. The long delay in complaint required a mandatory Longman warning which was not properly given at trial. The High Court may, in exceptional circumstances like this, grant special leave to appeal and decide a point of law not raised below where the interests of justice so require, and where the outcome could not have been altered by further evidence at trial.

Court Disposition

appeal allowed; conviction quashed; acquittal entered

Orders

  • Special leave to appeal granted; appeal treated as instituted and heard instanter, and allowed.
  • Set aside order of the Court of Criminal Appeal of New South Wales made on 1 June 1999.