Attorney-General v Van Dessel

[2006] QCA 285

SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND

CITATION:

Attorney-General (Qld) v Van Dessel [2006] QCA 285

PARTIES:

ERIC HENRI VAN DESSEL
(appellant/respondent)
v
ATTORNEY-GENERAL FOR THE STATE OF QUEENSLAND
(respondent/applicant)

FILE NO/S:

Appeal No 1971 of 2006
SC No 8126 of 2005

DIVISION:

Court of Appeal

PROCEEDING:

General Civil Appeal

ORIGINATING COURT:

Supreme Court at Brisbane

DELIVERED ON:

4 August 2006

DELIVERED AT:

Brisbane

HEARING DATE:

14 July 2006

JUDGES:

Jerrard and Holmes JJA and Mackenzie J
Separate reasons for judgment of each member of the Court, Holmes JA and Mackenzie J concurring as to the orders made, Jerrard JA dissenting in part

ORDER:

1.   Appeal allowed

2.   Set aside the order under appeal and make a fresh order in the same terms, with this change: that the words “until further order of the court” appearing in Paragraph 2 are replaced by the words “for the period of 20 years”

CATCHWORDS:

STATUTES – ACTS OF PARLIAMENT – INTERPRETATION – PARTICULAR WORDS AND PHRASES – construction of Dangerous Prisoners (Sexual Offenders) Act 2003 (Qld) (“the Act”) – indefinite supervision order imposed on appellant/respondent just prior to his release from prison – supervision order had effect until further order is made by the court – whether an indefinite supervision order that has effect “until further order of the court” satisfied a requirement in the Act that the order for his release be subject to stated conditions have effect “for the period stated in the order” – whether “period” has a finite quality – s 24 of the Act

Dangerous Prisoners (Sexual Offenders) Act 2003 (Qld), s 3, s 13(1), s 13(2), s 13(3), s 13(5), s 14, s 15, s 19, s 23, s 24


Attorney-General v Hansen [2006] QSC 35; BS 9941 of 2005, 6 March 2006, considered
Attorney-General v Van Dessel [2006] QSC 016; SC No 8126 of 2005, 10 February 2006, cited
Fardon v Attorney-General(Qld) (2004) 210 ALR 50; [2004] HCA 46, considered
Project Blue Sky Inc & Ors v Australian Broadcasting Authority (1998) 194 CLR 335, cited
Pyneboard Pty Ltd v Trade Practices Commission (1983) 152 CLR 328, considered

COUNSEL:

A W Moynihan for the appellant/respondent
J A Logan SC for the respondent/applicant

SOLICITORS:

Legal Aid Queensland for the appellant/respondent
Director of Public Prosecutions (Queensland) for the respondent/applicant

1. JERRARD JA:  This appeal involves the construction of the Dangerous Prisoners (Sexual Offenders) Act 2003 (“the Act”). The question is whether an order that Mr Van Dessel, on his release from custody, be subject to the conditions stated in the order “until further order of the Court”, satisfies a requirement of the Act that the order for his release subject to stated conditions have effect “for the period stated in the order.”

1. The objects of the Act, stated in s 3, are to provide for the continued detention in custody or supervised release of a particular class of prisoner to ensure adequate protection of the community, and to provide continuing control, care or treatment of a…