Heshmati v R [2012] NSWDC 143

Heshmati v R [2012] NSWDC 143

The prosecution failed to prove beyond reasonable doubt that Dr Heshmati knew his statement was false when declaring he had not transferred assets over a thousand dollars, as it was reasonably possible that misunderstanding or mistake as to the question's meaning explained the inaccuracy.

Parties
Appellant: Bijan Heshmati; Respondent: The Crown
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
30 May 2012
Procedural Posture
Criminal / Conviction Appeal
Outcome
Appeal allowed; conviction quashed
Legal Topics
Conviction Appeal, Transfer of Assets, Bankruptcy, False Statement, Statement of Affairs
Criminal Law Conviction Appeal Transfer of Assets Bankruptcy False Statement Statement of Affairs

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 2 Authorities cited 1 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Bijan Heshmati

Appellant

The Crown

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal / Conviction Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the appellant knowingly made a false declaration in a bankruptcy statement of affairs by declaring he had not transferred assets worth more than a thousand dollars in the past five years

Ratio Decidendi

The prosecution failed to prove beyond reasonable doubt that Dr Heshmati knew his statement was false when declaring he had not transferred assets over a thousand dollars, as it was reasonably possible that misunderstanding or mistake as to the question's meaning explained the inaccuracy.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; conviction quashed

Orders

  • The appeal is allowed
  • The conviction is quashed