TERENCE FRANCIS BARKER v. THE QUEEN
No. ACTG43 of 1994
JANICE DOREEN JUNE HARPER v. THE QUEEN
No. ACTG44 of 1994
ROBERT GEORGE CAMPBELL v. THE QUEEN
No. ACTG45 of 1994
FED No. 1041/94
Number of pages - 40
Criminal Law - Evidence - Trespass
(1994) 127 ALR 280
(1994) 54 FCR 451
COURT
IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
AUSTRALIAN CAPITAL TERRITORY DISTRICT REGISTRY
GENERAL DIVISION
JENKINSON(1), MILES(2) AND O'LOUGHLIN(1) JJ
CATCHWORDS
Criminal Law - Particular offences - Defraud the Commonwealth - To imperil the economic interest of the Commonwealth a defrauding.
Criminal Law - Particular offences - Organised fraud - Identification of constituent elements of the offence - Joinder of counts of "public fraud offences" satisfying s.83 (2)(a) of Proceeds of Crime Act 1987 (Cth) with count of organised fraud permissible.
Criminal Law - Appeal and new trial - Particular grounds - Irregularities in relation to jury - Prejudicial material not in evidence entering jury room - Miscarriage of justice.
Evidence - Admissibility - Evidence unlawfully or irregularly obtained - Telephonic interception outside Australia - Admissibility in Australian court considered.
Evidence - Mechanical records - Listening device - Proper construction of Australian Federal Police Act 1979, s.12F considered.
Trespass - Trespass to land - Justification - Leave and licence - Limited permission to enter - Entry and conduct on land ostensibly within permission - Covert recording by person entering of conversation with licensor - Held no trespass.
The Australian Federal Police Act 1979 - s 12F
The Crimes Act 1913 - s 29D
The Proceeds of Crime Act 1987 - s 83
T. C. Domican (No. 3) (1990) 46 A Cr R 428
R. v. Rinaldi (1993) 30 NSWLR 605
Reg. v. Marsland (unreported; Supreme Court of New South Wales; judgment 17 July 1991)
R. v. Emett (1988) 14 NSWLR 327
Byrne v. Kinematrograph Renters Society Ltd. (1958) 1 WLR 762
Barker v. The Queen (1983) 153 CLR 338
R. v. Pfennig (No. 1) (1992) 57 SASR 507
Bunning v. Cross (1978) 141 CLR 54
Wai Y-tsang v. The Queen (1992) 1 AC 269
R. v. Allsop (1976) 64 CRAR 29
HEARING
CANBERRA
#DATE 21:12:1994
Barker v. The Queen - ACTG43 of 1994
Dates of Hearing: 24-27 October and 4 November 1994
Counsel for the Appellant: Mr. N. Adams
Solicitors for the Appellant: J. Pappas
Counsel for the Respondent: Mr. P.S. Hastings QC and Mr.
G.J. Bellew
Solicitors for the Respondent: Director of Public
Prosecutions (Commonwealth)
Harper and Campbell v. The Queen - ACT G44 of 1994 and ACT G45 of 1994
Dates of Hearing: 31 October, 1-3 November, 1994
Counsel for The Appellant Mr. K.J. Crispin QC and
Harper: Mr. W.L. Donald
Counsel for the Appellant Mr. F.J. Purnell
Campbell:
Solicitors for the Appellants: McPhillamy Donald
Counsel for the Respondent: Mr. P.S. Hastings QC and Mr.
G.J. Bellew
Solicitors for the Respondent: Director of Public
Prosecutions (Commonwealth)
ORDER
Matter No. ACTG43 of 1994
DATE OF ORDER: 22 November 1994
THE COURT ORDERS THAT:
1. The appeal be…
Keep reading for free
Create a free CaseChat account to read Barker, T.F. v The Queen and more:
- Read every judgment in full
- Ask AI and get answers linked to paragraphs
- See how each paragraph was cited in later cases
- Download judgments as PDF or Word
One click creates your free account or signs you in.
By continuing you agree to the Terms and Privacy Policy.
- Case
- [1994] FCA 1041
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The High Court considered the interpretation of the statutory offence of defrauding the Commonwealth, focusing on whether the appellant's actions imperilled the economic interest of the Commonwealth. The court examined the elements of the offence and the mens rea required for conviction. Additionally, the court reviewed the trial judge's directions to the jury to ascertain whether they were sufficient to ensure a fair trial. The High Court found that there were errors in the trial process that warranted a new trial on certain counts, while affirming the conviction on other counts. The court held that the trial judge's instructions to the jury were inadequate in certain respects, leading to a miscarriage of justice.
In summary, the High Court allowed Barker's appeal in part, setting aside the verdict and conviction on several counts and ordering a new trial for those charges. The court dismissed the appeal in respect of other counts, affirming the convictions. The final orders included setting aside the verdict and quashing the conviction on specific counts, mandating a new trial for those charges, while dismissing the appeal on other counts and affirming the convictions. The settlement and entry of these orders were to be dealt with in accordance with Order 36 of the Federal Court Rules.
Orders
Orders of the court
Matter No. ACTG43 of 1994
DATE OF ORDER: 22 November 1994
THE COURT ORDERS THAT:
1. The appeal be allowed.
2. The verdict against the appellant on each of the first, second, fourth, seventh and eighth counts in the indictment be set aside and the conviction of the appellant on each of the said counts be quashed.
3. There be a new trial of the appellant on each of the said counts.
(Note: Settlement and entry of orders is dealt with in Order 36 of the Federal Court Rules.) Matter No. ACTG44 of 1994
THE COURT ORDERS THAT:
1. The appeal be dismissed.
(Note: Settlement and entry of orders is dealt with in Order 36 of the Federal Court Rules) Matter No. ACTG45 of 1994
THE COURT ORDERS THAT:
1. The appeal be dismissed.
(Note: Settlement and entry of orders is dealt within Order 36 of the Federal Court Rules)
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.