Afford v The Queen

The appellant, Afford, appealed against his conviction and sentence for importing a commercial quantity of a border controlled drug, namely cocaine, in contravention of the Criminal Code. The matter was heard in the High Court of Australia, with the appeal being allowed and the conviction set aside. The appeal hinged on the interpretation of the intentional fault elements required for the offence under section 307.1 of the Criminal Code and the adequacy of the jury directions.

The court examined whether it was open to the jury to infer the appellant's intention to import the drug based on the evidence presented. The legal issue was whether the reasoning from the case of Kural v The Queen (1987) 162 CLR 502, which dealt with inferring intent in drug importation cases, was applicable to the current charge. The court considered whether the jury was correctly directed on the inferential path of reasoning and whether the verdict was unreasonable or unsatisfactory.

The High Court held that it was not open to the jury to infer the appellant's intention to import the drug based on the evidence. The court found that the jury directions did not adequately address the inferential path of reasoning required to establish the intentional fault element. Consequently, the application for leave to appeal was granted, the appeal was allowed, and the conviction was set aside. The court entered a judgment and verdict of acquittal for the appellant.

The final orders of the court were that the appeal be allowed, the conviction be set aside, and a judgment and verdict of acquittal be entered in favour of the appellant.