Chen v R [2015] NSWCCA 122

Chen v R [2015] NSWCCA 122

The trial judge erred by giving a consciousness of guilt direction concerning the applicant's claim that the BJ Multilink transactions were genuine, because the falsity of that claim was the fundamental issue for the jury and was inextricably interwoven with his denial of guilt. However, there was no substantial miscarriage of justice because the Crown evidence on that issue was overwhelming and there was no realistic risk that the jury engaged in improper circular reasoning. The sentencing judge did not err in treating the involvement of innocent third parties as relevant to objective seriousness; even if there had been error, it was insignificant compared with the sustained, planned and...

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
29 May 2015
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal Against Conviction and Application for Leave to Appeal Against Sentence / Court of Criminal Appeal Appeal From the District Court Decision of Huggett DCJ Dated 7 June 2013
Outcome
Leave to appeal against conviction granted; appeal dismissed; leave to appeal against sentence refused.
Legal Topics
['obtaining a Benefit by Deception' 'attempting to Obtain a Benefit by Deception' 'business Activity Statements' 'gst Refund Fraud' 'consciousness of Guilt Direction' 'circular Reasoning' 'substantial Miscarriage of Justice' 'objective Seriousness']
['criminal Law' 'sentencing'] ['obtaining a Benefit by Deception' 'attempting to Obtain a Benefit by Deception' 'business Activity Statements' 'gst Refund Fraud' 'consciousness of Guilt Direction' 'circular Reasoning' 'substantial Miscarriage of Justice' 'objective Seriousness']

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 and Application for Leave to Appeal Against Sentence / Court of Criminal Appeal Appeal From the District Court Decision of Huggett DCJ Dated 7 June 2013

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether the trial judge erred in permitting the jury to use the applicant's evidence about BJ Multilink transactions as evidence of consciousness of guilt if it concluded that evidence was false." 'Whether any error in the consciousness of guilt direction caused a substantial miscarriage of justice.' 'Whether the sentencing judge erred in assessing objective seriousness by referring to the offences having involved innocent third parties.']

Ratio Decidendi

The trial judge erred by giving a consciousness of guilt direction concerning the applicant's claim that the BJ Multilink transactions were genuine, because the falsity of that claim was the fundamental issue for the jury and was inextricably interwoven with his denial of guilt. However, there was no substantial miscarriage of justice because the Crown evidence on that issue was overwhelming and there was no realistic risk that the jury engaged in improper circular reasoning. The sentencing judge did not err in treating the involvement of innocent third parties as relevant to objective seriousness; even if there had been error, it was insignificant compared with the sustained, planned and...

Court Disposition

Leave to appeal against conviction granted; appeal dismissed; leave to appeal against sentence refused.

Orders

  • ['Leave to appeal against conviction granted.' 'Appeal dismissed.' 'Leave to appeal against sentence refused.']