The King v Hunt

The King v Hunt concerned an appeal by the Crown against a decision of the District Court of New South Wales. The Crown sought to appeal against the acquittal of the respondent, Mr Hunt, on charges of assault occasioning actual bodily harm and common assault. The dispute arose from an incident where Mr Hunt, a police officer, apprehended a suspect.

The central legal issue before the Court of Criminal Appeal was whether the trial judge had erred in law by directing the jury that they must be satisfied beyond reasonable doubt that the force used by Mr Hunt was not reasonably necessary for the purpose of apprehending the suspect. The appeal specifically questioned the correct application of the test for self-defence and the use of force by police officers in the course of their duties.

The Court of Criminal Appeal, comprising Grant CJ, Burns J, and Riley AJ, held that the trial judge's direction to the jury was erroneous. The Court clarified that the onus is on the prosecution to prove beyond reasonable doubt that the force used by the police officer was not reasonably necessary for the lawful execution of their duty. The jury should have been directed to consider whether the prosecution had discharged this onus, rather than requiring the defence to prove the necessity of the force. The Court emphasised that the question of reasonable necessity is an objective one, to be assessed by the jury based on the circumstances as they reasonably appeared to the officer at the time.

The Court of Criminal Appeal allowed the Crown's appeal, quashed the acquittal, and ordered a new trial in the District Court.