Fingleton v The Queen

The High Court of Australia heard an appeal by the appellant, the Chief Magistrate of Queensland, against her conviction for unlawful retaliation against a witness under s 119B of the Criminal Code (Q). The dispute arose from the appellant's decision to initiate proceedings to remove a coordinating magistrate, Mr Gribbin, from his position. The appellant argued that her actions were protected by judicial immunity conferred upon magistrates exercising administrative functions under an Act, specifically s 21A of the Magistrates Act 1991 (Q) and s 28AA of the District Court Act 1967 (Q).

The central legal issues before the High Court were whether the appellant's actions in seeking to remove Mr Gribbin from his coordinating magistrate position constituted an exercise of an administrative function or power conferred under an Act, thereby attracting statutory immunity. Additionally, the Court considered whether the trial judge had misdirected the jury on the meaning of "without reasonable cause" in s 119B of the Criminal Code (Q), and whether the High Court should entertain new grounds of appeal not raised at trial or before the Court of Appeal.

The High Court allowed the appeal, quashing the appellant's conviction. The majority of the Court held that the appellant's conduct in initiating the show cause process for the removal of Mr Gribbin from his coordinating magistrate position was an exercise of an administrative function or power conferred under the Magistrates Act, and therefore she was entitled to the protection and immunity provided by s 21A of that Act. Consequently, she should not have been held criminally responsible. The Court declined to express a view on the remaining grounds of appeal, noting that the appellant had succeeded on her primary ground and that other points had not been properly raised or pursued in the lower courts.