Lia v WA

[2020] WASCA 216

Western Australia Court of Appeal

Built by Barristers,
For Australian Law.

See how it works

Interrogate

Catchwords

1. Criminal Law
2. › Appeal
3. › Appeal against conviction
4. › Unreasonable verdict
5. › Inconsistent verdicts
6. › Whether conviction on one count factually inconsistent with acquittal on another count
7. › Whether verdicts can be properly reconciled
8. › Criminal Appeals Act 2004 (WA), s 30(3)(a)
1. Criminal Law
2. › Drug offences
3. › Possession of prohibited drug with intent to sell or supply
4. › Elements of offence
5. › Knowledge
6. › Presumption of intent to sell or supply
7. › Whether presumption under s 11(a) provided rational basis for different verdicts on different counts
8. › Misuse of Drugs Act 1981 (WA), ss 6(1)(a), 11(a)
1. Criminal Law
2. › Trial
3. › Jury directions
4. › Separate verdicts direction
5. › Propriety of counsel interrupting summing up

Quick Take

Where a statutory presumption (such as the presumption of intent to sell or supply under s 11(a) of the Misuse of Drugs Act 1981 (WA)) applies to one count but not another, the availability of the presumption may provide a rational basis for reconciling a conviction on the count to which the presumption applies with an acquittal on the count to which it does not. A merciful verdict remains a permissible explanation for an acquittal on an attempt charge where police intervention prevented the completed offence.