R v CJP; R v CAD; R v MES [2003] NSWCCA 363

R v CJP; R v CAD; R v MES [2003] NSWCCA 363

The Court held that paragraph 3(e) of the judgment delivered on 21 July 2003 contained an error because the charge against CJP should relate to the complainant GS rather than ELP, and it was appropriate to amend the judgment by application of the slip rule.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
10 December 2003
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Amendment of Judgment by Application of the Slip Rule
Outcome
Paragraph 3(e) of R v CJP; R v CAD; R MES [2003] NSWCCA 187 amended.
Legal Topics
['court of Criminal Appeal' 'slip Rule' 'amendment of Judgment' 'recitation of Charge']
['criminal Law' 'criminal Procedure'] ['court of Criminal Appeal' 'slip Rule' 'amendment of Judgment' 'recitation of Charge']

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 1 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Amendment of Judgment by Application of the Slip Rule

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether paragraph 3(e) of the earlier judgment should be amended to correct an error in the recitation of one of the charges against CJP.']

Ratio Decidendi

The Court held that paragraph 3(e) of the judgment delivered on 21 July 2003 contained an error because the charge against CJP should relate to the complainant GS rather than ELP, and it was appropriate to amend the judgment by application of the slip rule.

Court Disposition

Paragraph 3(e) of R v CJP; R v CAD; R MES [2003] NSWCCA 187 amended.

Orders

  • ['Paragraph 3(e) is amended to state that between 14 November and 15 November 2000 at Macquarie Fields CJP did have sexual intercourse with GS without his consent and knowing that he was not consenting to the sexual intercourse, in circumstances of aggravation, namely that GS was a person aged under sixteen years...