Crime and Corruption Commission v Carne

The parties to this proceeding were the Crime and Corruption Commission ("the Commission") and Mr Carne, the Public Trustee of Queensland. The dispute concerned the Commission's ability to make public a report it had prepared following an investigation into alleged corrupt conduct and maladministration by the Public Trustee. The Commission sought to use the Parliamentary Crime and Corruption Committee ("the Committee") to facilitate the tabling of its report in the Legislative Assembly. The case reached the High Court of Australia on appeal.

The High Court was required to determine two primary legal issues. First, whether the Commission's report constituted an "other report" for the purposes of section 69(1)(b) of the *Crime and Corruption Act 2001* (Qld), which governs the tabling of reports by the Committee. Second, the Court had to consider whether section 8(1) of the *Parliament of Queensland Act 2001* (Qld) precluded the Court from making any declaration concerning the report, on the basis that its preparation and presentation constituted "proceedings in the Assembly" and were therefore immune from judicial review.

The Court reasoned that the report in question did not fall within the definition of an "other report" under section 69(1)(b) of the *Crime and Corruption Act 2001* (Qld), as that provision was intended to apply to reports made after a public hearing or research, which was not the case here. Furthermore, the Court held that the certificate issued by the Committee under section 55 of the *Parliament of Queensland Act 2001* (Qld) was determinative. This certificate certified that the report was prepared for the purposes of, or incidental to, transacting the business of the Committee under section 9(2)(c) of that Act. Consequently, the report was considered to be part of "proceedings in the Assembly" as defined by section 9 of the *Parliament of Queensland Act 2001* (Qld). Section 8(1) of that Act provides that such proceedings cannot be impeached or questioned in any court. Therefore, the Court was precluded from making any declaration concerning the report.

The appeal was dismissed with costs.