R v BURGESS; R v SAUNDERS [2005] NSWCCA 52

R v BURGESS; R v SAUNDERS [2005] NSWCCA 52

The evidence provided by the appellants was incapable of establishing a reasonable possibility that their actions constituted a reasonable response by way of self-defence under s418; there was no sufficient nexus between the threat perceived and the act done, and the Government's conduct was lawful. The trial judge was correct to exclude self-defence from the jury. The sentence and compensation orders were within the discretion of the trial judge and appropriately considered all relevant factors.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
23 February 2005
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Conviction and Sentence
Outcome
Appeals against conviction dismissed; leave to appeal against sentences granted; appeals against sentence dismissed.
Legal Topics
['self Defence' 'malicious Damage to Property' 'protest Actions' 'appeal Procedure' 'sentencing' 'compensation Orders']
['criminal Law'] ['self Defence' 'malicious Damage to Property' 'protest Actions' 'appeal Procedure' 'sentencing' 'compensation Orders']

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 / Appeal Against Conviction and Sentence

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the defence of self-defence (including defence of others) was rightly excluded by the trial judge in the circumstances of damage to the Opera House as a protest against war' 'Whether the act was done maliciously under s194 of the Crimes Act 1900' 'Whether the sentence imposed was excessive and failed to give weight to payment of compensation and other mitigating factors']

Ratio Decidendi

The evidence provided by the appellants was incapable of establishing a reasonable possibility that their actions constituted a reasonable response by way of self-defence under s418; there was no sufficient nexus between the threat perceived and the act done, and the Government's conduct was lawful. The trial judge was correct to exclude self-defence from the jury. The sentence and compensation orders were within the discretion of the trial judge and appropriately considered all relevant factors.

Court Disposition

Appeals against conviction dismissed; leave to appeal against sentences granted; appeals against sentence dismissed.

Orders

  • ['Convictions upheld' 'Leave to appeal sentence granted but appeals dismissed' 'Compensation order of $111,000 (in addition to $40,000 already paid) to Sydney Opera House Trust affirmed']