Burns v The Queen

The case of *Burns v The Queen* concerned an appeal to the High Court of Australia by Mrs Burns against her conviction for the manslaughter of David Hay. The prosecution's case was based on two alternative grounds: manslaughter by an unlawful and dangerous act, and manslaughter by criminal negligence. The deceased died from the combined effects of methadone, which the appellant and her husband supplied to him, and prescription drugs he had also taken.

The High Court was required to determine whether the appellant's supply of methadone to the deceased constituted an unlawful and dangerous act for the purposes of manslaughter. It also had to consider whether the appellant owed a legal duty of care to the deceased, and if so, whether her omission to obtain medical treatment for him amounted to criminal negligence causing his death. A further issue was whether there was sufficient evidence to support a new trial on the basis that the appellant administered or assisted in administering the drug to the deceased.

The Court held that the act of supplying a prohibited drug, without more, is not an unlawful and dangerous act capable of supporting a manslaughter conviction, as the danger lies in the ingestion of the drug, not the supply itself. This aligns with English authority, which the High Court affirmed. Regarding criminal negligence, the Court considered the circumstances in which a duty of care might arise, particularly where a defendant has played a causative role in events leading to a risk of injury. The Court found that the evidence did not establish that the appellant had administered or assisted in administering the methadone, nor that she had assumed a duty of care to the deceased that she grossly negligently breached by failing to seek medical assistance.

Consequently, the High Court allowed the appeal, set aside the order of the Court of Criminal Appeal of the Supreme Court of New South Wales, quashed the appellant's conviction for manslaughter, and entered a verdict of acquittal.