Gant v The Queen

The case of Gant v The Queen involved two appellants who were convicted of obtaining financial advantage by deception, as well as attempting to obtain financial advantage by deception. The appellants were part of a joint criminal enterprise that involved the sale of allegedly fake Brett Whiteley paintings. The Crown conceded the appeals, and the primary issue before the court was whether the jury must have entertained reasonable doubt regarding the applicants' guilt, and whether the inference of guilt was the only reasonable inference available on the evidence.

The court examined the evidence presented and the circumstances under which the jury reached their verdict. The trial judge had given the jury an invitation in accordance with R v Prasad, which allowed the jury to consider whether the evidence was so unsatisfactory or unreliable that it should not be acted upon. However, the jury rejected this invitation and entered verdicts of guilty against the appellants. The court considered whether the jury's verdict was unreasonable, and whether it was open to the court to conclude that no reasonable jury could have found the appellants guilty beyond reasonable doubt. The court referred to R v Baden-Clay and held that the jury's verdict was unreasonable.

The court found that the inference of guilt was not the only reasonable inference available on the evidence, and that the jury must have entertained reasonable doubt regarding the appellants' guilt. The court allowed the appeals and quashed the convictions. The reasoning of the court was based on the unreliability of the evidence presented and the need for the jury to have entertained reasonable doubt regarding the guilt of the appellants. The court held that the jury's verdict was unreasonable and that the appeals should be allowed. This decision highlights the importance of the reliability of evidence in criminal cases and the need for juries to carefully consider all the evidence before reaching a verdict.