Campbell v Australian Crime Commission

In *Campbell v Australian Crime Commission*, heard by Judge Cameron, the applicants sought reasons for decisions made by the Australian Crime Commission (ACC) to issue summonses. The core of the dispute revolved around whether these decisions were excluded from the obligation to provide reasons under section 13 of the *Administrative Decisions (Judicial Review) Act 1977* (Cth) (ADJR Act) by virtue of Schedule 2 of that Act. The applicants also raised issues concerning security for costs and the potential loss of confidentiality or waiver of legal professional privilege in relation to documents over which public interest immunity was claimed.

The primary legal issue before the court was the interpretation of Schedule 2 of the ADJR Act, specifically paragraph (e) which exempts decisions relating to the "administration of criminal justice" and paragraph (ea) which specifically exempts decisions under the *Australian Crime Commission Act 2002* (Cth) concerning intelligence operations or investigations of State offences with a federal aspect. The applicants contended that the ACC's functions did not fall within the ordinary meaning of the "administration of criminal justice" as it pertained to Australia's accusatorial system, and that the specific inclusion of ACC decisions in paragraph (ea) indicated paragraph (e) was not intended to apply to the ACC. Conversely, the ACC argued that the administration of criminal justice encompassed decisions requiring the production of documents, the giving of information, or the summoning of witnesses, which directly applied to their decisions to issue the summonses.

Judge Cameron considered the applicants' submission that Schedule 2 should be construed narrowly as it represented a departure from the general policy of the ADJR Act. The court also noted the applicants' reliance on *X7 v Australian Crime Commission* (2013) to support their argument that the ACC's operations were distinct from the administration of criminal justice. The ACC's counter-argument was that its summons powers fell squarely within the broader scope of decisions related to the administration of criminal justice, as contemplated by the ADJR Act. The court was required to determine whether the ACC's decisions to issue summonses were captured by the exceptions in Schedule 2, thereby relieving the ACC of its obligation to provide reasons under section 13 of the ADJR Act.