R v Finlayson [1912] HCA 48

R v Finlayson [1912] HCA 48

Evidence of similar acts by the accused in appropriating money sent for payment of wages was admissible to prove fraudulent intent and that the acts charged were part of a fraudulent scheme. The evidence remained relevant throughout the trial, not merely to rebut suggested accident or mistake, and was properly allowed to be considered by the jury.

Parties
Appellant: The King; Respondent: Walter James Finlayson
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
25 June 1912
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / On Appeal From the Supreme Court of Western Australia
Outcome
Appeal allowed; order appealed from discharged; conviction restored
Legal Topics
Stealing, Evidence, Fraudulent Intent, Similar Acts Evidence
Criminal Law Stealing Evidence Fraudulent Intent Similar Acts 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 4 Authorities cited 7 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

The King

Appellant

Walter James Finlayson

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / On Appeal From the Supreme Court of Western Australia

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether evidence of similar acts by the accused is admissible to prove fraudulent intent in a charge of stealing under the Criminal Code 1902 (W.A.), sec. 369

Ratio Decidendi

Evidence of similar acts by the accused in appropriating money sent for payment of wages was admissible to prove fraudulent intent and that the acts charged were part of a fraudulent scheme. The evidence remained relevant throughout the trial, not merely to rebut suggested accident or mistake, and was properly allowed to be considered by the jury.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; order appealed from discharged; conviction restored

Orders

  • Conviction restored
  • Case remitted to the Supreme Court to do what is just and consistent with this judgment