Briggs v The Queen

This matter concerns an application for special leave to appeal to the High Court of Australia. The applicant, Mr Briggs, sought leave to appeal against a decision of the Court of Criminal Appeal of Western Australia, which had unanimously dismissed his appeal against a conviction for conspiracy to defraud the Commonwealth.

The legal issues before the High Court included whether the Court of Criminal Appeal erred in dismissing Mr Briggs' appeal against his conviction. The prosecution relied on numerous overt acts, most of which were admitted at trial. The applicant had been convicted in a second trial after an earlier trial was aborted.

The applicant's counsel indicated that while the initial orders sought were for the conviction to be quashed and a new trial ordered, given that Mr Briggs had already served his minimum sentence and been released, the application would now press for the conviction to be quashed without an order for a new trial. The facts of the case were summarised in the judgment of the Court of Criminal Appeal, with particular attention drawn to the distinction between this case and what are commonly referred to as "bottom of the harbour" tax avoidance cases. In this instance, the applicant became a director of acquired companies, and returns were prepared under both the Companies Act and the Taxation Act.