R v Knell [2023] NSWDC 81

R v Knell [2023] NSWDC 81

The term 'cause to take' in s 38(b) Crimes Act 1900 should be interpreted according to its ordinary English meaning, so that if the accused intentionally does an act resulting in the complainant unknowingly ingesting an intoxicating substance, the element is satisfied; it is not necessary that the accused have authority or issue a command to the complainant.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
23 March 2023
Procedural Posture
Criminal Trial / Jury Direction Ruling; Application for Verdict by Direction Refused
Outcome
Application for verdict by direction refused; proposed direction to the jury clarified.
Legal Topics
['attempt to Cause a Person to Take an Intoxicating Substance' 'sexual Touching' 'jury Directions' "construction of 'cause to Take' S 38(b) Crimes Act 1900" 'verdict by Direction']

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 Trial / Jury Direction Ruling; Application for Verdict by Direction Refused

  1. 1 ["Meaning of 'cause to take' in s 38(b) Crimes Act 1900" "Whether 'cause to take' requires proof of command or direction or authority over the complainant" 'Whether the evidence could support a verdict of guilty on Count 1']

Ratio Decidendi

The term 'cause to take' in s 38(b) Crimes Act 1900 should be interpreted according to its ordinary English meaning, so that if the accused intentionally does an act resulting in the complainant unknowingly ingesting an intoxicating substance, the element is satisfied; it is not necessary that the accused have authority or issue a command to the complainant.

Court Disposition

Application for verdict by direction refused; proposed direction to the jury clarified.

Orders

  • ["Jury to be directed: 'Cause to take' means intentionally doing an act that resulted in the other person without their knowledge ingesting or taking in the intoxicating substance." 'No case submission by the defence refused.']