Grajewski v Director of Public Prosecutions (NSW)

The High Court of Australia considered an appeal by Mr Grajewski against a decision of the Director of Public Prosecutions (NSW). The dispute concerned the interpretation and application of provisions within the *Crimes Act 1900* (NSW) relating to the offence of stalking or intimidation.

The central legal issue before the High Court was whether the prosecution was required to prove that the accused intended to cause fear of serious harm or death, or whether it was sufficient to prove an intention to cause apprehension or alarm. This involved an examination of the elements of the offence as defined by the relevant legislation and how those elements should be construed in light of established principles of statutory interpretation.

The High Court held that the offence of stalking or intimidation under the *Crimes Act 1900* (NSW) does not require proof of an intention to cause fear of serious harm or death. Instead, the prosecution must prove an intention to cause apprehension or alarm. The Court reasoned that the language of the statute, particularly the phrase "causes serious alarm or serious fear," indicated that the focus was on the effect on the victim, and that the intention required was to produce that effect, not necessarily a specific level of fear. The Court affirmed that the objective circumstances surrounding the conduct were relevant to determining whether the conduct was likely to cause apprehension or alarm.

The appeal was dismissed.