← All Authorities
Australia
unreasonable verdictstandard of proof
Pell v The Queen
(2020) 268 CLR 123
Key Principle
Where there is a significant body of unchallenged evidence inconsistent with the complainant's account, an appellate court applying the M v The Queen test must find a verdict unreasonable if that evidence ought to have caused a jury, acting rationally, to entertain a reasonable doubt as to guilt, notwithstanding that the jury accepted the complainant as credible.
Area of Law
criminal
Related Cases
Ask CommonBench about this case
Get a detailed analysis of Pell v The Queen and how it applies to your situation.
Explain Pell v The Queen