Macdonald v R

[2024] NSWCCA 198

NSW Court of Criminal Appeal

View on CaseLaw

Built by Barristers,
For Australian Law.

See how it works

Interrogate

Catchwords

1. Criminal Law
2. › Common law offences
3. › Wilful misconduct in public office
4. › Elements of offence
5. › Misconduct element
6. › Whether improper purpose must be 'driving force' of impugned conduct
7. › Whether 'but for' test sufficient or additional requirement needed
1. Criminal Law
2. › Common law offences
3. › Wilful misconduct in public office
4. › Elements of offence
5. › Misconduct element
6. › Whether difference between 'purpose' and 'motivation'
7. › Whether use of 'motivation' constituted misdirection
1. Criminal Law
2. › Appeals
3. › Appeal against conviction
4. › Unreasonable verdict
5. › Judge-alone trial
6. › Circumstantial case
7. › Whether findings of guilt unsafe in absence of finding of motive
8. › Criminal Procedure Act 1986 (NSW), s 133
1. Criminal Law
2. › Appeals
3. › Appeal against conviction
4. › Leave to appeal
5. › Direction invited by counsel at trial
6. › Whether leave should be granted to impugn direction sought by appellant's own counsel
7. › Supreme Court (Criminal Appeal) Rules 2021 (NSW), r 4.15

Quick Take

The 'but for' test for the misconduct element in wilful misconduct in public office is not a universal requirement; in some cases the Crown must prove the improper purpose was the 'driving force', but in others a lesser causal connection may suffice. A finding of motive is not essential to sustain a conviction on a circumstantial case.