By -

Key decisions

  • Dimitriou v R [2025] NSWCCA 18
  • R v Skapik [2025] NSWCCA 19

Dimitriou v R [2025] NSWCCA 18

Fraud – elements of the offence – specific intent

The Court of Criminal Appeal (‘CCA’) held that, in a prosecution for fraud, it is not necessary for the Crown to prove the accused intended the financial advantage or financial disadvantage, or was reckless as to that outcome. The element of deception in this context already requires a causal connection to the outcome and it is enough if the relevant actions substantially led to that outcome.

The applicant was the director of a financial services company. He caused several false documents to be submitted to a bank in support of a loan application: false tax returns, false contracts for sale of land and a letter which misrepresented the purpose of the loan. The bank relied upon the documents in granting a loan. The matter proceeded by a judge-alone trial for a single offence under section 192E(1)(b) (by deception, dishonestly cause a financial disadvantage – more pithily entitled ‘fraud’ in the Crimes Act 1900 (NSW)), after which the trial judge found the applicant guilty. The applicant appealed both his conviction and his sentence, but this summary only deals with one of the several grounds in the conviction appeal.

You've reached the end of this article preview

There's more to read! Subscribe to LSJ today to access the rest of our updates, articles and multimedia content.

Subscribe to LSJ

Already an LSJ subscriber or Law Society member? Sign in to read the rest of the article.

Sign in to read more