A-G (Qld) v Fardon - [2015] QSC 20

SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND

CITATION:

A-G (Qld) v Fardon [2015] QSC 20

PARTIES:

ATTORNEY-GENERAL FOR THE STATE OF QUEENSLAND
(respondent)

v

ROBERT JOHN FARDON
(applicant)

FILE NO/S:

SC No 5346 of 2003

DIVISION:

Civil Jurisdiction

PROCEEDING:

Application

ORIGINATING COURT:

Supreme Court at Brisbane

DELIVERED ON:

10 February 2015

DELIVERED AT:

Brisbane

HEARING DATE:

16 September 2014

JUDGE:

Peter Lyons J

ORDER:

The applicant pay the respondent’s costs of and incidental to the application under s 22 of the Dangerous Prisoners’ (Sexual Offenders) Act 2003 (Qld), including the costs of and incidental to the proceedings before Philip McMurdo J, on a standard basis.

CATCHWORDS:

PROCEDURE – COSTS – JURISDICTION – GENERAL – where the respondent is subject to supervision orders under the Dangerous Prisoners’ (Sexual Offenders) Act 2003 (Qld) – where a warrant was issued under s 20 of that Act due to concerns held by the manager of the High Risk Offender Management Unit that the respondent would contravene those supervision orders by absconding – where an application for orders under s 22 of that Act was dismissed – where the respondent seeks costs – whether the Court has power to award costs under the Dangerous Prisoners’ (Sexual Offenders) Act 2003 (Qld)

STATUTES – ACTS OF PARLIAMENT – INTERPRETATION – Dangerous Prisoners’ (Sexual Offenders) Act 2003 (Qld) – where the respondent is subject to supervision orders under the Dangerous Prisoners’ (Sexual Offenders) Act 2003 (Qld) – where a warrant was issued under s 20 of that Act due to concerns held by the manager of the High Risk Offender Management Unit that the respondent would contravene those supervision orders by absconding – where an application for orders under s 22 of that Act was dismissed – where the respondent seeks costs – whether costs can only be awarded to the person the subject of a warrant under s 20 of that Act where the warrant is not based on a reasonable suspicion – whether that Act’s aims prevent the grant of costs to a person the subject of a warrant under s 20 of that Act

Civil Proceedings Act 2011 (Qld) s 15

Dangerous Prisoners’ (Sexual Offenders) Act 2003 (Qld) s 20, s 21, s 22

Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 1999 (Qld) r 678, r 680, r 681

Attorney General for the State of Queensland v Fardon [2013] QSC 264, cited

Attorney-General v Francis [2006] QCA 425, cited

COUNSEL:

J Horton QC with M Maloney for the applicant

DP O’Gorman SC for the respondent

SOLICITORS:

Crown Law for the applicant

Patrick Murphy for the respondent

On 3 September 2014 Philip McMurdo J made orders under s 22 of the Dangerous Prisoners' (Sexual Offenders) Act 2003 (DPSOA). One order adjourned for hearing on 16 September 2014, the determination under that section of the question whether the respondent is likely to contravene a requirement of a supervision order made under the DPSOA on 4 October 2013. Another order was that, pursuant to s 21(2)(a) of the DPSOA, the…

Grounds of appeal

[14] The appellant contends that the primary judge erred in finding that the respondent had discharged the onus of establishing the matters required under the relevant provision.

[15] It was submitted that his Honour failed to give adequate weight to the evidence of the second witness, and that the findings of fact were not reasonably open on the material before the Court.

[16] The respondent, for its part, submits that no error is disclosed, and that the conclusions reached were well within the range of outcomes available to the primary judge.

Consideration

[17] It is convenient to deal first with the question of construction, as the resolution of that issue informs the remaining grounds advanced by the appellant.

[18] For the reasons that follow, we are of the view that the appeal should be allowed in part and the matter remitted for further determination.

Continue reading A-G (Qld) v Fardon

Details

AGLC: A-G (Qld) v Fardon [2015] QSC 20
Case: [2015] QSC 20
Decision Date: 10 February 2015

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The case of A-G (Qld) v Fardon involved the Attorney-General of Queensland and a respondent who was subject to supervision orders under the Dangerous Prisoners’ (Sexual Offenders) Act 2003 (Qld). The dispute arose after a warrant was issued under section 20 of that Act, following concerns from the manager of the High Risk Offender Management Unit that the respondent would abscond and thereby contravene his supervision orders. Subsequently, an application for orders under section 22 of the Act was dismissed, prompting the respondent to seek costs against the Attorney-General.

The central legal issue before the court was whether the Court had the power to award costs under the Dangerous Prisoners’ (Sexual Offenders) Act 2003 (Qld). Specifically, the court needed to determine if costs could only be granted to a person who was the subject of a warrant under section 20 of the Act when the warrant was not based on a reasonable suspicion. Additionally, the court had to consider whether the objectives of the Act precluded the granting of costs to such individuals. The court was tasked with interpreting the relevant statutory provisions to ascertain the legislative intent concerning costs in such contexts.

The court found that the statutory framework did not explicitly restrict the court's ability to award costs in proceedings under the Act. It held that the purpose of the Act, which is to protect the community from sexual offenders, did not preclude the awarding of costs to the respondent in this instance. The court determined that the legislative intent did not dictate a blanket prohibition on awarding costs to individuals subject to warrants under section 20 of the Act. Consequently, the court ruled that it had the discretion to award costs, provided that the circumstances warranted such an award.

The final order of the court was that the applicant, the Attorney-General, was to pay the respondent's costs of and incidental to the application under section 22 of the Dangerous Prisoners’ (Sexual Offenders) Act 2003 (Qld), including the costs of and incidental to the proceedings before Philip McMurdo J, on a standard basis.

Orders

Orders of the court

The applicant pay the respondent’s costs of and incidental to the application under s 22 of the Dangerous Prisoners’ (Sexual Offenders) Act 2003 (Qld), including the costs of and incidental to the proceedings before Philip McMurdo J, on a standard basis.

Background

Background to the litigation

Full text does not contain this section.

Evidence

Evidence Before The Court

Full text does not contain this section.

Decision

Reasons for decision

Full text does not contain this section.

Ratio Decidendi

Legal Principle Established

Full text does not contain this section.

CITATION:	A-G (Qld) v Fardon [2015] QSC 20
PARTIES:	ATTORNEY-GENERAL FOR THE STATE OF QUEENSLAND (respondent) v ROBERT JOHN FARDON (applicant)
FILE NO/S:	SC No 5346 of 2003
DIVISION:	Civil Jurisdiction
PROCEEDING:	Application
ORIGINATING COURT:	Supreme Court at Brisbane
DELIVERED ON:	10 February 2015
DELIVERED AT:	Brisbane
HEARING DATE:	16 September 2014
JUDGE:	Peter Lyons J
ORDER:	The applicant pay the respondent’s costs of and incidental to the application under s 22 of the Dangerous Prisoners’ (Sexual Offenders) Act 2003 (Qld), including the costs of and incidental to the proceedings before Philip McMurdo J, on a standard basis.
CATCHWORDS:	PROCEDURE – COSTS – JURISDICTION – GENERAL – where the respondent is subject to supervision orders under the Dangerous Prisoners’ (Sexual Offenders) Act 2003 (Qld) – where a warrant was issued under s 20 of that Act due to concerns held by the manager of the High Risk Offender Management Unit that the respondent would contravene those supervision orders by absconding – where an application for orders under s 22 of that Act was dismissed – where the respondent seeks costs – whether the Court has power to award costs under the Dangerous Prisoners’ (Sexual Offenders) Act 2003 (Qld) STATUTES – ACTS OF PARLIAMENT – INTERPRETATION – Dangerous Prisoners’ (Sexual Offenders) Act 2003 (Qld) – where the respondent is subject to supervision orders under the Dangerous Prisoners’ (Sexual Offenders) Act 2003 (Qld) – where a warrant was issued under s 20 of that Act due to concerns held by the manager of the High Risk Offender Management Unit that the respondent would contravene those supervision orders by absconding – where an application for orders under s 22 of that Act was dismissed – where the respondent seeks costs – whether costs can only be awarded to the person the subject of a warrant under s 20 of that Act where the warrant is not based on a reasonable suspicion – whether that Act’s aims prevent the grant of costs to a person the subject of a warrant under s 20 of that Act Civil Proceedings Act 2011 (Qld) s 15 Dangerous Prisoners’ (Sexual Offenders) Act 2003 (Qld) s 20, s 21, s 22 Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 1999 (Qld) r 678, r 680, r 681 Attorney General for the State of Queensland v Fardon [2013] QSC 264, cited Attorney-General v Francis [2006] QCA 425, cited
COUNSEL:	J Horton QC with M Maloney for the applicant DP O’Gorman SC for the respondent
SOLICITORS:	Crown Law for the applicant Patrick Murphy for the respondent