{ tooltip = 'Copied'; setTimeout(() => tooltip = 'Copy Link', 2000); })" :data-tip="tooltip" class="tooltip tooltip-primary tooltip-bottom" class="cursor-pointer" role="button">
Brawn v The King
Download as PDF
Download as Word
Highlights
My Notes
Collections
Create a New Collection
Overview
Full Text
{ tooltip = 'Copied'; setTimeout(() => tooltip = 'Copy Link', 2000); })" :data-tip="tooltip" class="tooltip tooltip-primary tooltip-bottom" class="cursor-pointer" role="button">
Details
Case
Agency Issuance Number
Published Date
Brawn v The King
[2025] HCA 20
Tags
No tags available
Case
Brawn v The King
[2025] HCA 20
•
HIGH COURT OF AUSTRALIAGAGELER CJ,GORDON, EDELMAN, STEWARD, GLEESON, JAGOT AND BEECH‑JONES JJMATHEW CUCU BRAWN APPELLANTANDTHE KING RESPONDENTBrawn v The King[2025] HCA 20Date of Hearing: 4 December 2024Date of Judgment: 7 May 2025A20/2024ORDER1.Appeal allowed.2.Set aside the order made by the Court of Appeal of the Supreme Court of South Australia on 15 September 2022 and, in lieu thereof, the appellant's appeal to the Court of Appeal be allowed, his conviction set aside, and a new trial ordered.On appeal from the Supreme Court of South AustraliaRepresentationS G Henchliffe KC with A J Culshaw for the appellant (instructed by Caldicott & Isaacs Lawyers)M G Hinton KC with K J Draper and W M Scobie for the respondent (instructed by Director of Public Prosecutions (SA))R J Sharp KC with T M Wood for the Commonwealth Director of Public Prosecutions, intervening (instructed by Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions (Cth))B A Hatfield SC with E R Nicholson for the Director of Public Prosecutions (NSW), intervening (instructed by Solicitor for Public Prosecutions (NSW))Notice: This copy of the Court's Reasons for Judgment is subject to formal revision prior to publication in the Commonwealth Law Reports.CATCHWORDSBrawn v The KingCriminal practice – Appeal – Irregularity in criminal trial – Where principal issue at trial was whether perpetrator was appellant or another adult member of complainant's community – Where after trial prosecution disclosed appellant's father had been charged with sexual offences against another child – Where appellant appealed conviction on ground that there had been a miscarriage of justice...
Continue reading the full case
Tags
No tags available
Case
Brawn v The King
[2025] HCA 20
•
HIGH COURT OF AUSTRALIAGAGELER CJ,GORDON, EDELMAN, STEWARD, GLEESON, JAGOT AND BEECH‑JONES JJMATHEW CUCU BRAWN APPELLANTANDTHE KING RESPONDENTBrawn v The King[2025] HCA 20Date of Hearing: 4 December 2024Date of Judgment: 7 May 2025A20/2024ORDER1.Appeal allowed.2.Set aside the order made by the Court of Appeal of the Supreme Court of South Australia on 15 September 2022 and, in lieu thereof, the appellant's appeal to the Court of Appeal be allowed, his conviction set aside, and a new trial ordered.On appeal from the Supreme Court of South AustraliaRepresentationS G Henchliffe KC with A J Culshaw for the appellant (instructed by Caldicott & Isaacs Lawyers)M G Hinton KC with K J Draper and W M Scobie for the respondent (instructed by Director of Public Prosecutions (SA))R J Sharp KC with T M Wood for the Commonwealth Director of Public Prosecutions, intervening (instructed by Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions (Cth))B A Hatfield SC with E R Nicholson for the Director of Public Prosecutions (NSW), intervening (instructed by Solicitor for Public Prosecutions (NSW))Notice: This copy of the Court's Reasons for Judgment is subject to formal revision prior to publication in the Commonwealth Law Reports.CATCHWORDSBrawn v The KingCriminal practice – Appeal – Irregularity in criminal trial – Where principal issue at trial was whether perpetrator was appellant or another adult member of complainant's community – Where after trial prosecution disclosed appellant's father had been charged with sexual offences against another child – Where appellant appealed conviction on ground that there had been a miscarriage of justice...
showFlash = false, 6000)"
>