Clarkson v The Commonwealth

The High Court of Australia heard an appeal in *Clarkson v The Commonwealth*. The dispute concerned the validity of a notice issued under s 353D of the *Criminal Code* (Cth) to the appellant, Mr Clarkson, requiring him to attend before an authorised officer for examination. Mr Clarkson contended that the notice was invalid because it was issued by an officer of the Australian Federal Police who was not an "authorised officer" for the purposes of s 353D, arguing that the relevant delegation of power was ineffective.

The central legal issue before the High Court was whether the Commissioner of the Australian Federal Police had validly delegated the power to issue notices under s 353D of the *Criminal Code* to Assistant Commissioners, and subsequently, whether an Assistant Commissioner had validly delegated that power to a particular Detective Sergeant. This involved an examination of the *Australian Federal Police Act 1979* (Cth) and the *Criminal Code* (Cth), particularly the provisions relating to the delegation of powers by the Commissioner and the definition of an "authorised officer".

The High Court held that the delegation of the power to issue notices under s 353D of the *Criminal Code* by the Commissioner of the Australian Federal Police to Assistant Commissioners was valid. Their Honours found that the *Australian Federal Police Act* permitted such a delegation. Furthermore, the Court determined that the subsequent delegation by an Assistant Commissioner to the Detective Sergeant was also valid, as the power to delegate had been properly conferred. Consequently, the notice issued to Mr Clarkson was valid, and his appeal was dismissed.