BRC v R [2020] NSWCCA 176
The omission of Bench Book directions cautioning against 'bad character' and 'punishing for other conduct' reasoning in relation to tendency evidence admitted via charged acts did not constitute error or cause a miscarriage of justice, as such directions were not required or appropriate in the circumstances; the differentiation of context evidence from tendency evidence was correct.
- Jurisdiction
- Australia
- Judgment Date
- 27 July 2020
- Procedural Posture
- Criminal Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal Conviction
- Outcome
- Leave to appeal refused; application dismissed
- Legal Topics
- ['tendency Evidence' 'context Evidence' 'jury Directions' 'bench Book Directions' 'child Sexual Offences']
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal Conviction
Legal Issues
- 1 ['Whether omission of certain directions regarding tendency evidence as suggested in the Criminal Trial Courts Bench Book constituted an appellable error' 'Whether the trial judge erred in differentiating context evidence from tendency evidence in jury directions']
Ratio Decidendi
The omission of Bench Book directions cautioning against 'bad character' and 'punishing for other conduct' reasoning in relation to tendency evidence admitted via charged acts did not constitute error or cause a miscarriage of justice, as such directions were not required or appropriate in the circumstances; the differentiation of context evidence from tendency evidence was correct.
Court Disposition
Leave to appeal refused; application dismissed
Orders
- ['Extend, to the extent necessary, the time in which to appeal against conviction' 'Refuse leave under r 4 of the Criminal Appeal Rules to rely on the pleaded ground of appeal' 'Dismiss the application for leave to appeal']
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment