Regina v Munro [1999] NSWCCA 31

Regina v Munro [1999] NSWCCA 31

There was no evidence upon which a jury could find that the payment to Hogan was intended as an inducement for him to act contrary to his duty as a councillor; thus an essential element of the offence of common law bribery was not proved.

Parties
Crown: Regina; Appellant: Roger Gareth Munro
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
09 March 1999
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Appeal From Conviction
Outcome
Appeal allowed
Legal Topics
Common Law Bribery, Sufficiency of Evidence
Criminal Law Common Law Bribery Sufficiency of Evidence

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 1 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Regina

Crown

Roger Gareth Munro

Appellant

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Appeal From Conviction

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether sufficient evidence existed to support conviction for common law bribery
  2. 2 Whether the payment to Councillor Hogan was an inducement to act contrary to his duty

Ratio Decidendi

There was no evidence upon which a jury could find that the payment to Hogan was intended as an inducement for him to act contrary to his duty as a councillor; thus an essential element of the offence of common law bribery was not proved.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed

Orders

  • Conviction and sentence quashed
  • Verdict and judgment of acquittal on the second count directed