Haralampos Korres v The Queen

Haralampos Korres appealed his conviction for assault occasioning actual bodily harm, contrary to section 24 of the *Crimes Act 1900* (ACT). The appeal was heard by the Supreme Court of the Australian Capital Territory, constituted by Penfold and Buchanan JJ and Nield AJ.

The primary legal issues before the Court were whether the jury's verdict was unsafe and unsatisfactory, given inconsistencies in the evidence presented by Crown witnesses regarding the circumstances of the assault, and whether the jury had been misdirected by the trial judge. Specifically, the appellant argued that the trial judge's directions concerning the rejection of witness evidence were flawed, potentially conferring a presumption of truthfulness upon witnesses and confusing the jury.

The Court found that, despite the differing accounts provided by Crown witnesses, it remained open to the jury to be satisfied beyond reasonable doubt of the appellant's guilt. Regarding the directions on witness evidence, the Court acknowledged they were not standard but concluded that even if there was a misdirection, no substantial miscarriage of justice had occurred, referencing section 37O(3) of the *Supreme Court Act 1933* (ACT).

Consequently, the Court dismissed the appeal.