WILLIAMS, Daniel Lee v REGINA [2006] NSWCCA 26

WILLIAMS, Daniel Lee v REGINA [2006] NSWCCA 26

The claim of right defence does not extend to detaining a person for payment of a debt, and the jury directions provided were adequate given corroborating evidence exists for certain counts. The verdicts were not unreasonable and the appeal is dismissed.

Parties
Applicant: Daniel Lee Williams; Respondent: The Crown
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
17 February 2006
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Conviction
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Appeal Against Conviction, Maliciously Inflicting Grievous Bodily Harm, Kidnapping, Attempted Kidnapping, Jury Directions, Claim of Right, Unreasonable Verdicts
Criminal Law Appeal Against Conviction Maliciously Inflicting Grievous Bodily Harm Kidnapping Attempted Kidnapping Jury Directions Claim of Right Unreasonable Verdicts

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 3 Authorities cited 8 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 8
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Daniel Lee Williams

Applicant

The Crown

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Conviction

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Availability of claim of right defence in kidnapping/inflicting grievous bodily harm charges
  2. 2 Adequacy of jury directions regarding acquittals on separate counts
  3. 3 Unreasonableness of verdicts given reliability of complainant's evidence

Ratio Decidendi

The claim of right defence does not extend to detaining a person for payment of a debt, and the jury directions provided were adequate given corroborating evidence exists for certain counts. The verdicts were not unreasonable and the appeal is dismissed.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed