← All Authorities
Australia Leading Case legal and evidential burden

Pell v The Queen

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

Summary

Appellate court must itself assess whether jury verdict was unreasonable where unchallenged opportunity evidence raised reasonable doubt as to guilt.

Key Principle

unreasonable verdict; appellate review of jury verdict; reasonable doubt based on unchallenged evidence of opportunity

Area of Law

criminal

Related Cases

Smethurst v Commissioner of Police (2020) 272 CLR 177

Search warrant executed at journalist's home held invalid for technical defects; High Court considered scope of implied freedom of political communication but declined to quash the warrant on that basis.

De Silva v The Queen (2019) 268 CLR 57

The High Court considered the Browne v Dunn rule and the appropriate jury directions when a party fails to cross-examine a witness on a matter it intends to contradict.

Lordianto v Commissioner of the Australian Federal Police (2019) 266 CLR 1

High Court considered forfeiture orders under the Proceeds of Crime Act 2002 (Cth) in the context of cuckoo smurfing money laundering schemes.

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