Attorney-General's Application pursuant to s 108 Crimes (Appeal and Review) Act 2001 (NSW): Re Robert Burton (a pseudonym)

[2021] NSWCCA 87

NSW Court of Criminal Appeal

View on CaseLaw

Built by Barristers,
For Australian Law.

See how it works

Interrogate

Catchwords

1. Criminal Law
2. › Fraud
3. › Dishonestly obtain financial advantage or cause financial disadvantage by deception
4. › Causation
5. › Whether deception an operative cause of financial advantage or disadvantage
6. › Where bet placed by deception and winnings paid
7. › Whether causal chain broken by intervening event of horse or dog winning race
8. › Crimes Act 1900 (NSW), s 192E(1)(b)
1. Criminal Law
2. › Fraud
3. › Financial advantage
4. › Whether a bet capable of constituting a financial advantage
5. › Crimes Act 1900 (NSW), s 192E(1)(b)
1. Criminal Law
2. › Directed acquittal
3. › Capacity of evidence to establish elements of offence
4. › Whether evidence incapable of supporting finding of causation
5. › Whether question of causation for jury
1. Appeals
2. › Jurisdiction of appellate court
3. › Court of Criminal Appeal
4. › Submission of question of law by Attorney General following acquittal
5. › Whether court has discretion to decline to exercise jurisdiction properly invoked
6. › Whether mandatory language 'is to hear and determine' confers obligation
7. › Crimes (Appeal and Review) Act 2001 (NSW), s 108

Quick Take

Where a person obtains the opportunity to place a bet by deception, the winnings from that bet are capable of constituting a financial advantage obtained by, or financial disadvantage caused by, the deception for the purposes of s 192E(1)(b) of the Crimes Act 1900 (NSW); the placement of the bet as a 'step along the way' does not necessarily sever the causal chain. A bet itself is capable of constituting a financial advantage. The CCA has no discretion to decline to answer questions properly submitted under s 108(2) of the Crimes (Appeal and Review) Act 2001 (NSW).