Regina v NEK [2001] NSWCCA 392

Regina v NEK [2001] NSWCCA 392

In the circumstances of this case, where the jury acquitted the appellant on ten out of eleven sexual offence counts based on similar evidence from the complainant, logic and reasonableness required that the jury's guilty verdict on count 11 could not be sustained. There was no significant difference in the complainant's evidence on count 11 as compared to the other counts, so the guilty verdict was unreasonable and must be set aside.

Parties
Appellant: Regina; Respondent: NEK
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
03 October 2001
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Appeal From Conviction and Sentence
Outcome
Appeal allowed
Legal Topics
Sexual Offences, Appeals, Inconsistent Verdicts

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

Parties

Regina

Appellant

NEK

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Appeal From Conviction and Sentence

  1. 1 Whether a guilty verdict on one count can be sustained when there are acquittals on multiple other counts based on similar evidence from the same complainant
  2. 2 Whether the verdict on count 11 was unreasonable or inconsistent in light of the acquittals on other counts

Ratio Decidendi

In the circumstances of this case, where the jury acquitted the appellant on ten out of eleven sexual offence counts based on similar evidence from the complainant, logic and reasonableness required that the jury's guilty verdict on count 11 could not be sustained. There was no significant difference in the complainant's evidence on count 11 as compared to the other counts, so the guilty verdict was unreasonable and must be set aside.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed

Orders

  • Conviction and verdict on count 11 set aside
  • Verdict and judgment of acquittal entered