Carr v R

[2023] NSWCCA 269

NSW Court of Criminal Appeal

View on CaseLaw

Built by Barristers,
For Australian Law.

See how it works

Interrogate

Catchwords

1. Criminal Law
2. › Defences
3. › Duress
4. › Elements of the defence
5. › Demand or request to commit the specific offence charged
6. › Whether demand must be direct and overt or may be implied
7. › Whether evidence supported inference of demand
1. Criminal Law
2. › Appeals
3. › Appeal against conviction
4. › Judge-alone trial
5. › Whether trial judge's ruling was preliminary determination or final determination as tribunal of fact
1. Criminal Law
2. › Defences
3. › Duress
4. › Coercive control relationship
5. › Whether continuing threat sufficient to constitute demand to commit particular offences
6. › Crimes Act 1900 (NSW), ss 97, 154A, 154C

Quick Take

The common law defence of duress requires both a threat of harm and a separate demand or request to commit the specific offence charged; while the demand may in some circumstances be inferred, a continuing threat alone without any evidence (direct or circumstantial) of a demand to commit the particular offence is insufficient.

Case Details

Citation[2023] NSWCCA 269

CourtNSWCCA

JurisdictionNew South Wales

Unlock so much more with Barrister AI

The full text is available to signed-in members.

Relies on8

2022Rowan (a pseudonym) v The KingVSCA 236
2015Filippou v The QueenHCA 29
2009Taiapa v The QueenHCA 53
2007Clarkson v ReginaNSWCCA 70
and 4 more after sign-in

Create free account

Already have an account? Sign in