Sultan v R [2008] NSWCCA 175

Sultan v R [2008] NSWCCA 175

The Court determined that while it was open to find the appellant had knowledge and intent, there was no sufficient evidence that he 'used' the false instrument within the meaning of s 300(2) as there was no actual deployment by him or on his behalf, nor a joint criminal enterprise alleged. Thus, the conviction could not stand.

Parties
Appellant: Wayne Denis Sultan; Respondent: Regina
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
24 July 2008
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Appeal From Conviction and Sentence
Outcome
Appeal allowed; conviction quashed; verdict of acquittal directed
Legal Topics
Property Offences, Use of False Instruments, Meaning of 'use', Appeal Against Conviction, Crimes Act 1900 S 300(2)
Criminal Law Property Offences Use of False Instruments Meaning of 'use' Appeal Against Conviction Crimes Act 1900 S 300(2)

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

Parties

Wayne Denis Sultan

Appellant

Regina

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Appeal From Conviction and Sentence

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the appellant had the necessary knowledge and intent for the offence under s 300(2) of the Crimes Act 1900
  2. 2 Whether the appellant 'used' the false instrument within the meaning of s 300(2) of the Crimes Act 1900

Ratio Decidendi

The Court determined that while it was open to find the appellant had knowledge and intent, there was no sufficient evidence that he 'used' the false instrument within the meaning of s 300(2) as there was no actual deployment by him or on his behalf, nor a joint criminal enterprise alleged. Thus, the conviction could not stand.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; conviction quashed; verdict of acquittal directed

Orders

  • Appeal allowed
  • Conviction quashed