Lordianto & Anor v. Commissioner of the Australian Federal Police
Case No.
S110/2019
Related matter
P17/2019 – Kalimuthu & Anor v. Commissioner of the Australian Federal Police
Case Information
Lower Court Judgment
11/09/2018 Supreme Court of New South Wales (Court of Appeal) (Beazley P, Payne JA, McColl JA)
Catchwords
Criminal law – Proceeds of crime – Where large number of deposits were made into bank accounts in amounts of less than $10,000 – Whether each Court of Appeal misconstrued “third party” in s 330(4)(a) of the Proceeds of Crime Act 2002 (Cth) to exclude person who acquires property at time it becomes proceeds or an instrument of an offence – Whether each Court of Appeal wrongly interpreted term “sufficient consideration” in ss 330(4)(a) and 338 as requiring connection between third party acquirer of property and person from whom property passed – Whether each Court of Appeal erred in interpreting and applying “circumstances that would not arouse a reasonable suspicion, that the property was proceeds of an offence or an instrument of an offence” in s 330(4)(a).
Documents*
22/03/2019 Hearing (SLA, Sydney v/link Perth)
02/04/2019 Notice of appeal
08/05/2019 Written submissions (Appellants)
08/05/2019 Chronology (Appellants)
05/06/2019 Written submissions (Respondent)
24/06/2019 Reply
07/08/2019 Hearing (Full Court, Canberra) (Audio-visual recording)
07/08/2019 Outline of oral argument (Appellants)
08/08/2019 Hearing (Full Court, Canberra) (Audio-visual recording)
08/08/2019 Outline of oral argument (Respondent)
13/11/2019 Judgment (Judgment summary)
Minogue v. State of Victoria
Case No.
M162/2018
Case Information
Catchwords
Constitutional law – Parole – Where plaintiff convicted of murder of police officer – Where plaintiff sentenced to life imprisonment – Where non-parole period expired on 30 September 2016 – Where Corrections Amendment (Parole) Act 2018 (Vic) inserted new ss 74AAA, 74AB and 127A into Corrections Act 1986 (Vic) – Whether s 74AAA applies to plaintiff or to consideration of grant of parole to him – Whether ss 74AB and (if applicable) 74AAA substantively amount to cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment within meaning of Art 7 of International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights – Whether provision(s) invalid as unconstitutional and/or beyond power of Victorian Parliament.
Documents
23/10/2018 Writ of summons
13/12/2018 Hearing (Single Justice, Melbourne)
22/01/2019 Notice of constitutional matter (Plaintiff)
14/02/2019 Special Case Stated
27/02/2019 Written submissions (Plaintiff)
08/03/2019 Written submissions (International Commission of Jurists (Victoria) seeking leave to intervene)
26/03/2019 Written submissions (Defendant)
02/04/2019 Written submissions (Attorney-General for the State of New South Wales intervening)
02/04/2019 Written submissions (Attorney-General for the State of South Australia intervening)
02/04/2019 Written submissions (Attorney-General for the State of Western Australia intervening)
05/04/2019 Hearing (Single Justice, Melbourne)
23/04/2019 Reply
18/06/2019 Hearing (Full Court, Canberra) (Audio-visual recording)
18/06/2019 Outline of oral argument (Plaintiff)
18/06/2019 Outline of oral argument (Defendant)
18/06/2019 Outline of oral argument (Attorney-General for the State of New South Wales intervening)
18/06/2019 Outline of oral argument (Attorney-General for the State of South Australia intervening)
18/06/2019 Outline of oral argument (Attorney-General for the State of Western Australia intervening)
11/09/2019 Judgment (Judgment summary)
Fennell v. The Queen
Case No.
B20/2019
Case Information
Lower Court Judgment
21/07/2017 Supreme Court of Queensland (Court of Appeal) (Gotterson & Philippides JJA, Byrne SJA)
Catchwords
Criminal law – Where appellant convicted by jury of murder and sentenced to life imprisonment – Where appellant contended on appeal that there was reasonable hypothesis consistent with innocence open on evidence – Whether Court of Appeal erred in failing to find that the verdict was unreasonable or could not be supported having regard to evidence, in part because it made significant errors of fact.
Documents*
22/03/2019 Hearing (SLA, Melbourne v/link Brisbane)
03/04/2019 Notice of appeal
10/05/2019 Written submissions (Appellant)
10/05/2019 Chronology (Appellant)
07/06/2019 Written submissions (Respondent)
28/06/2019 Reply
11/09/2019 Hearing (Full Court, Canberra) (Audio-visual recording)
(Pronouncement of orders included)
11/09/2019 Outline of oral argument (Appellant)
11/09/2019 Outline of oral argument (Respondent)
06/11/2019 Judgment (Judgment summary)
Commissioner of Taxation v. Sharpcan Pty Ltd
Case No.
M52/2019
Case Information
Lower Court Judgment
27/09/2018 Federal Court of Australia (Greenwood ACJ, McKerracher & Thawley JJ)
Catchwords
Taxation – Where Administrative Appeals Tribunal held that outgoing of $600,300 incurred by the trustee of the Daylesford Royal Hotel Trust in the year ended 30 June 2010 for acquisition of 18 gaming machine entitlements under Gambling Regulation Act 2003 (Vic) was on revenue account and therefore deductible under s 8-1 of the Income Tax Assessment Act 1997 (Cth) – Whether Full Court (by majority) erred in upholding the decision of Tribunal instead of finding that outgoing was “of capital, or of a capital nature” – Whether Full Court erred in holding that if it was outgoing of capital or of a capital nature, it was expenditure to which s 40-880(6) of Income Tax Assessment Act applied and accordingly a deduction was allowable to trustee in respect of expenditure under s 40-880(2).
Documents*
20/03/2019 Determination (SLA, Canberra)
03/04/2019 Notice of appeal
08/05/2019 Written submissions (Appellant)
08/05/2019 Chronology (Appellant)
05/06/2019 Written submissions (Respondent)
07/06/2019 Amended written submissions (Respondent)
26/06/2019 Reply
09/08/2019 Hearing (Full Court, Canberra) (Audio-visual recording)
09/08/2019 Outline of oral argument (Appellant)
09/08/2019 Outline of oral argument (Respondent)
16/10/2019 Judgment (Judgment summary)
Taylor v. Attorney-General of the Commonwealth
Case No.
M36/2018
Case Information
Catchwords
Administrative law – Judicial review – Where plaintiff lodged charge-sheet and summons at Magistrates’ Court against Aung Sun Suu Kyi (serving Foreign Minister of Myanmar) for a crime against humanity (deportation or forcible transfer of population) contrary to ss 268.11 and 268.115 of the Criminal Code Act 1995 (Cth) – Where plaintiff sought defendant’s consent under s 268.121 of the Criminal Code Act to commence proceedings – Where consent refused – Whether the decision to refuse consent reviewable – Whether defendant misunderstood the law and committed jurisdictional error in refusing consent – Whether Aung Sun Suu Kyi immune from prosecution in Australia under customary international law – Whether defendant failed to afford plaintiff procedural fairness.
Documents*
23/03/2018 Application for an order to show cause
03/10/2018 Hearing (Single Justice, Melbourne)
19/11/2018 Hearing (Single Justice, Melbourne)
26/11/2018 Special case stated
14/01/2019 Written submissions (Plaintiff)
14/01/2019 Chronology (Plaintiff)
14/01/2019 Notice of constitutional matter (Plaintiff)
18/02/2019 Written submissions (Defendant)
07/03/2019 Reply (Plaintiff)
08/03/2019 Hearing (Single Justice, Melbourne v/link Sydney)
21/05/2019 Annotated submissions (Defendant)
05/06/2019 Annotated reply (Plaintiff)
07/06/2019 Amended annotated submissions (Plaintiff)
19/06/2019 Hearing (Full Court, Canberra) (Audio-visual recording)
(Pronouncement of orders included)
19/06/2019 Outline of oral argument (Plaintiff)
11/09/2019 Judgment (Judgment summary)