Under s 86(4)(a) of the Crimes Act 1900 (ACT), the Crown must prove not merely the absence of a belief in a legal right to appropriate property, but the existence of a positive belief that the accused had no legal right. A state of uncertainty as to legality is insufficient to establish dishonesty. Evidence that an accused considered conduct 'ethically wrong' does not establish a belief that it was legally wrong. The ACT provision differs from the Victorian equivalent by including s 86(4)(b), which reflects [name withheld]'s broader approach in [name withheld].
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 1 later case that cites this judgment.