Spies v The Queen

Criminal law – Director charged with defrauding creditors of the company - Alternative charge of improper use of position as director - Conviction on first charge by jury - Conviction set aside by Court of Criminal Appeal - What facts the jury must have been satisfied of from their finding of guilt with respect to the first charge - Whether Court of Criminal Appeal had power to substitute conviction on the alternative charge in the circumstances.

Criminal law – Construction of provision conferring power on the Court of Criminal Appeal to substitute a verdict of guilty of an offence different from the offence which the jury convicted of - Standard of proof required to apply the provision.

Criminal law – Director charged with defrauding creditors of the company - Direction to the jury equated director's intention to hinder or delay the creditors with defrauding - Misdirection.

Criminal law – Elements of offence of defrauding.

Company law – Whether directors by reason of their position owe an independent duty to and enforceable by the creditors.

Words and phrases – "jury must have been satisfied of facts which proved the appellant guilty of other offence", "to defraud", "defrauding".

Companies (New South Wales) Code – s 229(4).

Crimes Act 1900 (NSW) – s 176A.

Criminal Appeal Act 1912 (NSW) – s 7(2).