Skelly v WA

[2020] WASCA 3

Western Australia Court of Appeal

Built by Barristers,
For Australian Law.

See how it works

Interrogate

Catchwords

1. Criminal Law
2. › Offences
3. › Fraud
4. › Causation element in fraud offence
5. › Whether deceit need be sole cause of benefit
6. › Whether open to jury to be satisfied that deceit was a substantial or significant cause
7. › Criminal Code (WA), s 409(1)(c)
1. Criminal Law
2. › Sentencing
3. › Finding facts for purposes of sentencing after trial
4. › Principle that person not to be punished for offence of which not convicted
5. › Where sentencing judge found forgery as aggravating factor
6. › Where forgery not part of State's particulars of deceit
7. › Whether judge erred in treating forgery as aggravating factor
1. Criminal Law
2. › Sentencing
3. › Fairness in sentencing process
4. › State bound by its particulars
5. › Where appellant's evidence not challenged in cross-examination
6. › Whether sentencing judge could make adverse finding beyond scope of State's case

Quick Take

The causation element in s 409(1) of the Criminal Code (WA) requires both factual and legal causation, applying the same principles as ss 270 and 272: the accused's deceit must be a substantial or significant cause of the benefit, not the sole cause. At sentencing for fraud, a judge cannot find as an aggravating factor conduct constituting a separate uncharged offence that was not part of the State's particulars of deceit, even where the evidence might support such a finding.