← All Authorities
Australia unreasonable verdictstandard of proof

Pell v The Queen

(2020) 268 CLR 123
JurisdictionAustralia
CourtHigh Court of Australia
Year2020
StatusBinding authority

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

Smethurst v Commissioner of Police (2020) 272 CLR 177
De Silva v The Queen (2019) 268 CLR 57
Lordianto v Commissioner of the Australian Federal Police Lordianto v Commissioner of the Australian Federal Police (2019) 266 CLR 1; [2019] HCA 39

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