Smith v The QueenCitation:[2017] HCA 19Before:Kiefel CJ, Bell, Gageler, Keane, Nettle, Gordon, Edelman JJDate:10 May 2017Case Number:S249/2016, M144/2016Read more
Intent to import a border controlled drug cannot be inferred solely from awareness of a real or significant chance of the presence of the substance; the jury must be satisfied beyond reasonable doubt that the accused meant to import the substance.
- Parties
- Accused: Unknown (Accused persons); Prosecution: Commonwealth of Australia
- Jurisdiction
- Australia
- Judgment Date
- 10 May 2017
- Procedural Posture
- Criminal Appeal / Judgment
- Outcome
- appeal allowed
- Legal Topics
- Fault Element, Intent, Inferential Reasoning, Importation of Drugs, Jury Directions
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Unknown (Accused persons)
Accused
Commonwealth of Australia
Prosecution
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Judgment
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether intent to import a border controlled drug can be inferred from awareness of a real or significant chance of the presence of the substance
- 2 Whether the process of inferential reasoning identified in Bahri Kural v The Queen applies
- 3 Whether jury directions improperly conflated intent with recklessness
Ratio Decidendi
Intent to import a border controlled drug cannot be inferred solely from awareness of a real or significant chance of the presence of the substance; the jury must be satisfied beyond reasonable doubt that the accused meant to import the substance.
Court Disposition
appeal allowed
Orders
- Verdict set aside
- New trial ordered
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