Orman v The Queen

Orman v The Queen concerned a criminal appeal against a conviction for murder. The appellant, Orman, sought to appeal his conviction on the basis of a fundamental breach of duty by his trial counsel, which was alleged to have subverted his right to a fair trial. The Court of Appeal was referred to the case under the Criminal Procedure Act 2009. The central legal issues revolved around whether the appellant's trial counsel's actions constituted a fundamental breach of duty, whether this breach resulted in a substantial miscarriage of justice, and whether a re-trial would be just in the circumstances.

The Court of Appeal considered whether the appellant's trial counsel had indeed committed a fundamental breach of duty by encouraging the presentation of principal evidence against him, which would have been an egregious error. The court found that such conduct amounted to a fundamental breach of duty. Furthermore, the court determined that this breach had indeed led to a substantial miscarriage of justice, as it undermined the fairness of the trial. Consequently, the conviction was quashed. Given the gravity of the breach and the potential for prejudice in a re-trial, the court concluded that it would not be just to order a re-trial. Instead, the court entered a verdict of acquittal for the appellant.

The court's decision was grounded in the need to uphold the integrity of the criminal justice system and to ensure that the appellant received a fair trial. The court found that the Crown's concession of a substantial miscarriage of justice was appropriate, and that ordering a re-trial would not remedy the unfairness caused by the counsel's conduct. The court entered a verdict of acquittal under the provisions of the Criminal Procedure Act 2009, reflecting its determination that the appellant should not face another trial under the current circumstances.