Smyth v The Queen [1957] HCA 24

Smyth v The Queen [1957] HCA 24

Special leave was refused because, although the impugned direction on intent was not in accordance with law, the evidence was such that a properly directed jury could not reasonably fail to infer that when the appellant struck the deceased several times with a wrench he intended to cause grievous bodily harm.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Procedural Posture
Criminal Application for Special Leave to Appeal / Application for Special Leave to Appeal
Outcome
Application for special leave to appeal refused.
Legal Topics
['specific Intent' 'grievous Bodily Harm' 'jury Directions' 'natural Consequences of Acts' 'special Leave to Appeal']
['criminal Law' 'appellate Procedure'] ['specific Intent' 'grievous Bodily Harm' 'jury Directions' 'natural Consequences of Acts' 'special Leave to Appeal']

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 Application for Special Leave to Appeal / Application for Special Leave to Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether special leave to appeal should be granted notwithstanding an erroneous jury direction on intent.' 'Whether a jury properly directed could reasonably fail to infer that the appellant intended to cause grievous bodily harm when he struck the deceased several times with a wrench.']

Ratio Decidendi

Special leave was refused because, although the impugned direction on intent was not in accordance with law, the evidence was such that a properly directed jury could not reasonably fail to infer that when the appellant struck the deceased several times with a wrench he intended to cause grievous bodily harm.

Court Disposition

Application for special leave to appeal refused.

Orders

  • ['Application refused.' 'Application for special leave to appeal refused.']