Brott v The Queen

The case of *Brott v The Queen* concerned an appeal to the High Court of Australia following a conviction for forgery. The appellant, Brott, had been found guilty of forging a guarantee. The central dispute revolved around whether the attestation clause within the guarantee, which falsely asserted that the surety's signature had been witnessed by the attesting witness, constituted a forged document.

The High Court was required to determine whether the attestation clause, by falsely stating that the surety's signature was made in the witness's presence, rendered the entire guarantee document a forgery at common law. This involved an examination of the elements of the offence of forgery, particularly in relation to documents that contain false statements about their execution.

The Court held that the attestation clause, by falsely representing the circumstances of the signature's execution, did indeed render the guarantee a forged document. The reasoning was that the attestation clause was an integral part of the guarantee, and its falsity meant that the document, as presented, did not represent a true record of its execution. The legal principle applied was that a document is forged if it is made with the intention of deceiving by falsely representing that it is what it purports to be, or that it is made under circumstances in which it was not made.

The appeal was dismissed, and the conviction for forgery was upheld.