Farhad Qaumi v R; Mumtaz Qaumi v R [2019] NSWCCA 60

Farhad Qaumi v R; Mumtaz Qaumi v R [2019] NSWCCA 60

The convictions were not unreasonable because, after independently reviewing the whole of the evidence, the Court held that it was open to the trial judge to find beyond reasonable doubt that the applicants engaged Witness L to murder Joseph Antoun. The trial judge was entitled to accept supported parts of the informer evidence, reject unsupported or unreliable parts, and rely on the combined circumstantial case, including the meetings on 11 December 2013 involving the applicants, Witness L, Witness M and Elias; the events on 16 December 2013 shortly before the murder involving the applicants, Witness L and Witness C; the sham kebab shop transaction connecting Elias and the applicants;...

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
29 March 2019
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal Against Conviction / Applications for Leave to Appeal Against Convictions After Judge Alone Trial in the Supreme Court of NSW
Outcome
In each appeal, leave to appeal against conviction was granted and the appeal was dismissed.
Legal Topics
['murder' 'judge Alone Trial' 'unreasonable Verdict' 'circumstantial Evidence' 'informer Evidence' 'firearms Possession' 'contract Killing']
['criminal Law' 'criminal Appeals' 'evidence'] ['murder' 'judge Alone Trial' 'unreasonable Verdict' 'circumstantial Evidence' 'informer Evidence' 'firearms Possession' 'contract Killing']

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 Against Conviction / Applications for Leave to Appeal Against Convictions After Judge Alone Trial in the Supreme Court of NSW

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the verdicts of guilty for murder were unreasonable and inconsistent with the evidence.' "Whether Farhad Qaumi's conviction for possessing a pistol contrary to s 7(1) of the Firearms Act 1996 (NSW) was unreasonable and inconsistent with the evidence." 'Whether the trial judge was entitled to accept critical parts of informer evidence despite significant credibility issues and alleged alternative hypotheses.']

Ratio Decidendi

The convictions were not unreasonable because, after independently reviewing the whole of the evidence, the Court held that it was open to the trial judge to find beyond reasonable doubt that the applicants engaged Witness L to murder Joseph Antoun. The trial judge was entitled to accept supported parts of the informer evidence, reject unsupported or unreliable parts, and rely on the combined circumstantial case, including the meetings on 11 December 2013 involving the applicants, Witness L, Witness M and Elias; the events on 16 December 2013 shortly before the murder involving the applicants, Witness L and Witness C; the sham kebab shop transaction connecting Elias and the applicants;...

Court Disposition

In each appeal, leave to appeal against conviction was granted and the appeal was dismissed.

Orders

  • ['Leave to appeal against conviction granted.' 'The appeal is dismissed.']