Papadimitropoulos v The Queen: Legal Significance of the Judgment

Criminal Law
1

Table of Contents
Facts of Case....................................................................................................................................3
Legal issues raised in the court........................................................................................................3
Cases relied on in judgment.............................................................................................................4
Decision of Court.............................................................................................................................4
Legal significance of judgment.......................................................................................................5
References........................................................................................................................................5
2

Facts of Case
The appellant Papadimitropoulos was found guilty of rape, for which he pleaded not guilty. He
was tried before the Supreme Court of Victoria by Gavan Duffy J. along with a jury of twelve
men. A verdict of rape was provided by the jury returned with justifying situations and the trial
judge sentenced the accused to be imprisoned for four years (Austlii, 1958). Papadimitropoulos
to plead against the conviction sentence applied for leave and when the application was heard
before the Court of Criminal Appeal of the State of Victoria, the application was refused. Again
he wanted special leave to appeal to the High Court of Australia.
Papadimitropoulos and Dina Karnezi applied for the marriage registry at the registry office of
Fitzroy in Victoria. They signed a card and a form that was to be filled by officer using details
provided by the applicants. The card was a notice of intention regarding the occurrence of
marriage while form was an information paper regarding details for registration and completing
the marriage certificate (Hongkong Case Law, 2016). They lived with each other for a short
period of time during which, they had sexual intercourse. After some days, he went to Sydney
leaving the girl alone and asked for her forgiveness in a letter. He mentioned that he wanted to
marry her but changed his mind after hearing about bad accounts of her prior reputation and
character.
Legal issues raised in the court
The legal authorities were restricted to fraud being the essential nature of act of intercourse. The
respondent provided her consent to intercourse believing it to be the marital intercourse, which
was actually, extra-marital. However, there is no difference in the nature of act in both the
perspectives that would vitiate the provided consent, it must arise from the nature of act itself.
3