R v Stephen (No. 5) [2018] NSWSC 170

R v Stephen (No. 5) [2018] NSWSC 170

The application for a Prasad direction was refused because the jury had not been adequately instructed on the structure and elements of self-defence in homicide, and because the evaluative judgment regarding reasonableness of response should properly be left for the jury.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
20 February 2018
Procedural Posture
Criminal Trial / Application for Prasad Direction During Jury Trial for Manslaughter
Outcome
application refused
Legal Topics
['procedure' 'trial by Jury' 'manslaughter' 'self Defence' 'prasad Direction']
['criminal Law'] ['procedure' 'trial by Jury' 'manslaughter' 'self Defence' 'prasad Direction']

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 Trial / Application for Prasad Direction During Jury Trial for Manslaughter

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether a Prasad direction should be given regarding the 'second leg' of self-defence in a manslaughter trial"]

Ratio Decidendi

The application for a Prasad direction was refused because the jury had not been adequately instructed on the structure and elements of self-defence in homicide, and because the evaluative judgment regarding reasonableness of response should properly be left for the jury.

Court Disposition

application refused

Orders

  • ['Application for Prasad direction rejected']