The Court of Appeal held that the trial judge erred in declining to direct the jury on the s 22 Criminal Code claim of right defence in a robbery prosecution, even though the appellant's primary case was that the money was voluntarily given rather than taken. Where there was an evidentiary basis for an honest claim of right to the money (here, a claimed entitlement to compensation), the defence had to be left to the jury as an alternative basis for acquittal, consistent with Gilbert v R. The convictions for robbery with personal violence and robbery were quashed and retrials ordered. A separate application for leave to appeal against sentence for assault occasioning bodily harm was dismissed.
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 5 later cases that cite this judgment.
2 of the 5 citing cases carry a classified treatment. How each court treated it is available to signed-in members.