Perara-Cathcart v The Queen

HIGH COURT OF AUSTRALIAKIEFEL, BELL, GAGELER, KEANE, NETTLE AND GORDON JJPEDRO PERARA-CATHCART  APPELLANTANDTHE QUEEN  RESPONDENTPerara-Cathcart v The Queen[2017] HCA 91 March 2017A39/2016ORDERAppeal dismissed.On appeal from the Supreme Court of South AustraliaRepresentationM E Shaw QC with S A McDonald for the appellant (instructed by Ben Sale)I D Press SC with D P Evans for the respondent (instructed by Director of Public Prosecutions (SA))Notice:  This copy of the Court's Reasons for Judgment is subject to formal revision prior to publication in the Commonwealth Law Reports.CATCHWORDSPerara-Cathcart v The QueenCriminal law – Appeal against conviction – Directions to jury – Where discreditable conduct evidence admitted under s 34P of Evidence Act 1929 (SA) – Relevance of discreditable conduct evidence – Whether trial judge adequately directed jury as to permissible and impermissible uses of discreditable conduct evidence in accordance with s 34R. Criminal law – Appeal against conviction – Application of proviso – Criminal Law Consolidation Act 1935 (SA), s 353(1) – Where majority of Full Court found miscarriage of justice occasioned by misdirection to jury – Where majority of Full Court divided as to whether misdirection occasioned substantial miscarriage of justice for purposes of applying proviso – Whether appeal could be dismissed pursuant to proviso. Words and phrases – "discreditable conduct evidence", "error of law", "opinion of majority", "permissible and impermissible use", "proviso", "substantial miscarriage of justice", "sufficiency of direction".  Criminal Law Consolidation Act 1935 (SA), ss 349, 353(1).Evidence Act 1929 (SA), ss 34P, 34R.KIEFEL, BELL AND KEANE JJ. The appellant was charged with...