KING v REGINA [2008] NSWCCA 101

KING v REGINA [2008] NSWCCA 101

There was no miscarriage of justice in the trial judge's directions; the essential issues and legal elements were properly put to the jury, and there was no requirement to further elaborate on the defence case, which lacked evidentiary support. The facts clearly established the appellant's guilt under s176A of the Crimes Act 1900.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
13 May 2008
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Court of Criminal Appeal Judgment
Outcome
Appeal dismissed.
Legal Topics
['fraud' 'jury Directions' 'property Offences' 'false Pretences' 'appellate Review']
['criminal Law'] ['fraud' 'jury Directions' 'property Offences' 'false Pretences' 'appellate Review']

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 Appeal / Court of Criminal Appeal Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the trial judge failed to properly identify the issues to the jury' 'Whether the trial judge failed to properly put the defence case to the jury' 'Whether the conviction is unsafe and unsatisfactory on the evidence']

Ratio Decidendi

There was no miscarriage of justice in the trial judge's directions; the essential issues and legal elements were properly put to the jury, and there was no requirement to further elaborate on the defence case, which lacked evidentiary support. The facts clearly established the appellant's guilt under s176A of the Crimes Act 1900.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed.

Orders

  • []