R v Kearnes; R v Paton [2013] NSWSC 1139

R v Kearnes; R v Paton [2013] NSWSC 1139

A real risk of positive injustice to Mr Kearnes would arise if the trials remained joint, given the highly prejudicial nature of Ms Schwind’s evidence against Mr Paton which would be difficult for a jury to disregard in relation to Mr Kearnes, especially as the case against Mr Kearnes is weaker. Therefore, the tests for severance laid down in R v Middis and related authorities are met, justifying separate trials.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
09 August 2013
Procedural Posture
Criminal / Interlocutory Application for Separate Trials
Outcome
Separate trials ordered
Legal Topics
['joint Trial' 'separate Trial' 'application for Separate Trial' 'admission by Co Accused' 'prejudice' 'compartmentalisation of Evidence' 'positive Injustice']

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 / Interlocutory Application for Separate Trials

  1. 1 ['Whether the joint trial of two co-accused should be severed and separate trials ordered due to prejudicial evidence admissible against only one accused' 'Whether a positive injustice would arise from a joint trial']

Ratio Decidendi

A real risk of positive injustice to Mr Kearnes would arise if the trials remained joint, given the highly prejudicial nature of Ms Schwind’s evidence against Mr Paton which would be difficult for a jury to disregard in relation to Mr Kearnes, especially as the case against Mr Kearnes is weaker. Therefore, the tests for severance laid down in R v Middis and related authorities are met, justifying separate trials.

Court Disposition

Separate trials ordered

Orders

  • ['The trials of Peter John Kearnes and Christopher John Paton for the murder of the deceased are to proceed separately.']