R v Beckett
Case
•
[2015] HCA 38
•23 October 2015
Details
AGLC
Case
Decision Date
R v Beckett [2015] HCA 38
[2015] HCA 38
23 October 2015
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The High Court of Australia heard an appeal by the Director of Public Prosecutions against an order of the Court of Criminal Appeal of the Supreme Court of New South Wales, which had permanently stayed the prosecution of the respondent for perverting the course of justice under section 319 of the *Crimes Act 1900* (NSW). The respondent, a solicitor, was alleged to have altered photocopies of cheques and given false evidence under oath during a compelled interview concerning property transfers for which no duty had been paid. The core of the dispute concerned whether the offence of perverting the course of justice under section 319 could apply to conduct committed before the commencement of judicial proceedings.
The legal issue before the High Court was whether the offence of perverting the course of justice under section 319 of the *Crimes Act 1900* (NSW) is confined to conduct occurring after judicial proceedings have commenced, or if it extends to acts done with the intention of frustrating or deflecting contemplated judicial proceedings. The Court was required to determine the meaning of "course of justice" within the context of section 319 and whether it necessitates the prior invocation of a court's or tribunal's jurisdiction.
The High Court allowed the appeal, finding that the submission of the appellant that an act done before the commencement of judicial proceedings could constitute an offence under section 319, where done with the intent to frustrate or deflect contemplated judicial proceedings, must be accepted. The Court indicated that, for the time being, trial judges should continue to direct juries that proof of an offence under section 319 requires proof beyond reasonable doubt that the accused performed the alleged act or omission, that this act or omission had a tendency to pervert the course of justice, and that it was intended to pervert the course of justice. The orders of the Court of Criminal Appeal permanently staying the prosecution were set aside, and the appeal to that Court was dismissed.
The legal issue before the High Court was whether the offence of perverting the course of justice under section 319 of the *Crimes Act 1900* (NSW) is confined to conduct occurring after judicial proceedings have commenced, or if it extends to acts done with the intention of frustrating or deflecting contemplated judicial proceedings. The Court was required to determine the meaning of "course of justice" within the context of section 319 and whether it necessitates the prior invocation of a court's or tribunal's jurisdiction.
The High Court allowed the appeal, finding that the submission of the appellant that an act done before the commencement of judicial proceedings could constitute an offence under section 319, where done with the intent to frustrate or deflect contemplated judicial proceedings, must be accepted. The Court indicated that, for the time being, trial judges should continue to direct juries that proof of an offence under section 319 requires proof beyond reasonable doubt that the accused performed the alleged act or omission, that this act or omission had a tendency to pervert the course of justice, and that it was intended to pervert the course of justice. The orders of the Court of Criminal Appeal permanently staying the prosecution were set aside, and the appeal to that Court was dismissed.
Details
Key Legal Topics
Areas of Law
-
Criminal Law
-
Statutory Interpretation
Legal Concepts
-
Charge
-
Intention
-
Appeal
-
Jurisdiction
Actions
Download as PDF
Download as Word Document
Citations
R v Beckett [2015] HCA 38
Most Recent Citation
Tasmania v Thompson [2022] TASSC 51
Cases Citing This Decision
13
Beckett and Tax Practitioner's Board
[2018] AATA 1860
R v Cranston (No 9)
[2021] NSWSC 1413
Cases Cited
18
Statutory Material Cited
2
R v Rogerson
[1992] HCA 25
R v Rogerson
[1992] HCA 25
R v Rogerson
[1992] HCA 25
Cited Sections