Crump v New South Wales

The High Court of Australia considered a special case concerning the validity of certain New South Wales legislation in relation to the plaintiff, Crump. The dispute centred on whether provisions of the *Crimes (Administration of Sentences) Act 1999* (NSW) and the *Sentencing Act 1989* (NSW) impermissibly interfered with judgments of the Supreme Court of New South Wales, thereby infringing Chapter III of the Commonwealth Constitution.

The legal issues before the Court were whether a determination made under s 13A of the *Sentencing Act 1989* (NSW) constituted a "matter" within the meaning of s 73 of the Constitution, and whether s 154A of the *Crimes (Administration of Sentences) Act 1999* (NSW) was invalid for having the effect of setting aside, varying, altering, or otherwise stultifying a judgment, decree, order, or sentence of a Chapter III court.

The Court reasoned that the sentence imposed by the Supreme Court on 20 June 1974, a sentence of imprisonment for life, was not altered by subsequent legislative changes concerning the executive determination of parole. The Court noted that the power to impose sentence was exhausted upon its imposition, and the subsequent executive decision regarding release on parole did not make the original sentence more punitive. Applying this principle, the Court concluded that s 154A of the *Crimes (Administration of Sentences) Act 1999* (NSW) did not vary or alter the resentencing decision made by McInerney J.

The High Court answered the questions in the special case. It held that s 154A of the *Crimes (Administration of Sentences) Act 1999* (NSW), in its purported application to the plaintiff, was not invalid for varying or otherwise altering a judgment, decree, order, or sentence of the Supreme Court of New South Wales in a "matter" within the meaning of s 73 of the Constitution. Consequently, there was no order as to the costs of the special case.