TJ v R [2009] NSWCCA 257

TJ v R [2009] NSWCCA 257

By majority, the Court held that the directions given in the appellant's trials, though framed as cautions rather than warnings, sufficiently conveyed the risks and dangers required by a Longman warning, and it was not essential for the trial judge to use the specific words 'dangerous to convict' or 'warning'; therefore, the appeal should be dismissed.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
21 October 2009
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Conviction
Outcome
Appeal dismissed (by majority)
Legal Topics
['appeal Against Conviction' 'sexual Assault' 'judicial Directions' 'delay in Complaint' 'longman Warning' 'interpretation of Legislation' 'transitional Provisions']
['criminal Law'] ['appeal Against Conviction' 'sexual Assault' 'judicial Directions' 'delay in Complaint' 'longman Warning' 'interpretation of Legislation' 'transitional Provisions']

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 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Conviction

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the trial judge failed to adequately warn the jury in accordance with Longman v The Queen regarding the dangers of convicting the accused given the disadvantage caused by delay in complaint' 'Whether the direction given by the trial judge was sufficient as a warning or whether it was merely a caution or comment' 'Whether s 294 of the Criminal Procedure Act 1986 as amended applied to the proceedings or the unamended section applied']

Ratio Decidendi

By majority, the Court held that the directions given in the appellant's trials, though framed as cautions rather than warnings, sufficiently conveyed the risks and dangers required by a Longman warning, and it was not essential for the trial judge to use the specific words 'dangerous to convict' or 'warning'; therefore, the appeal should be dismissed.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed (by majority)

Orders

  • []