Burns v The Queen [2012] HCA 35

Burns v The Queen [2012] HCA 35

The mere supply of methadone by the appellant to a fully informed, responsible adult was not an unlawful and dangerous act capable of founding criminal liability for manslaughter, as any risk arose from the drug's ingestion and not its supply. The evidence did not support a finding beyond reasonable doubt that the appellant administered or assisted in administering the drug, nor that she was under a legal duty of care to the deceased whose voluntary act in ingesting the drug could not be causally attributed to her; thus, the conviction for manslaughter could not stand and a verdict of acquittal was required rather than a retrial.

Parties
Appellant: Natalie Burns; Respondent: The Queen
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
14 September 2012
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / High Court Appeal From Court of Criminal Appeal (nsw)
Outcome
Appeal allowed; conviction quashed; verdict of acquittal entered
Legal Topics
Manslaughter, Unlawful and Dangerous Act, Criminal Negligence, Duty of Care, Drug Offences
Criminal Law Manslaughter Unlawful and Dangerous Act Criminal Negligence Duty of Care Drug Offences

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 2 Authorities cited 19 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 5
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Natalie Burns

Appellant

The Queen

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / High Court Appeal From Court of Criminal Appeal (nsw)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether supply of prohibited drug to deceased constituted an unlawful and dangerous act sufficient to support a conviction for manslaughter
  2. 2 Whether there was sufficient evidence to warrant a retrial on the basis that the appellant administered or assisted in administering methadone to the deceased
  3. 3 Whether the appellant owed a legal duty to obtain medical assistance for the deceased and if omission could constitute manslaughter by criminal negligence

Ratio Decidendi

The mere supply of methadone by the appellant to a fully informed, responsible adult was not an unlawful and dangerous act capable of founding criminal liability for manslaughter, as any risk arose from the drug's ingestion and not its supply. The evidence did not support a finding beyond reasonable doubt that the appellant administered or assisted in administering the drug, nor that she was under a legal duty of care to the deceased whose voluntary act in ingesting the drug could not be causally attributed to her; thus, the conviction for manslaughter could not stand and a verdict of acquittal was required rather than a retrial.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; conviction quashed; verdict of acquittal entered

Orders

  • Set aside the order of the Court of Criminal Appeal of the Supreme Court of New South Wales made on 1 April 2011, and in lieu thereof order that: the appeal to that Court be allowed; the appellant's conviction for the manslaughter of David Hay be quashed; and a verdict of acquittal be entered.