Legal Research
Cases
High Court Bulletin

High Court Bulletin

Link copied

Case Copied 15 March 2024 59 min read

Contents

On this page

High Court Bulletin

Produced by the Legal Research Officer,
High Court of Australia Library

[2024] HCAB 2 (15 March 2024)

A record of recent High Court of Australia cases: decided, reserved for judgment, awaiting hearing in the Court’s original jurisdiction, granted special leave to appeal, refused special leave to appeal and not proceeding or vacated

1: Summary of New Entries
2: Cases Handed Down
3: Cases Reserved
4: Original Jurisdiction
5: Section 40 Removal
6: Special Leave Granted
7: Cases Not Proceeding or Vacated
8: Special Leave Refused

1: Summary of New Entries

2: Cases Handed Down

Case	Title
Hurt v The King; Hurt v The King; Delzotto v The King	Criminal Law
The King v Anna Rowan – A Pseudonym	Criminal Law
Xerri v The King	Criminal Law
Lesianawai v Minister for Immigration, Citizenship and Multicultural Affairs	Immigration
AB (a pseudonym) v Independent Broad-based Anti-corruption Commission	Statutes
Redland City Council v Kozik	Statutes

3: Cases Reserved

Case	Title
Obian v The King	Criminal Law
The Director of Public Prosecutions v Benjamin Roder (a pseudonym)	Evidence
Greylag Goose Leasing 1410 Designated Activity Company & Anor v P.T. Garuda Indonesia Ltd	Private International Law
Godolphin Australia Pty Ltd ACN 093921021 v Chief Commissioner of State Revenue	Taxation
Mallonland Pty Ltd ACN 051 136 291 & Anor v Advanta Seeds Pty Ltd ACN 010 933 061	Torts
Bird v DP (a pseudonym)	Torts

4: Original Jurisdiction

5: Section 40 Removal

Case	Title
Bogan & Anor v The Estate of Peter John Smedley (Deceased) & Ors	Practice and Procedure

6: Special Leave Granted

Case	Title
JZQQ v Minister for Immigration, Citizenship and Multicultural Affairs & Anor	Constitutional Law
State of New South Wales v Wojciechowska & Ors	Constitutional Law
Tapiki v Minister for Immigration, Citizenship and Multicultural Affairs	Constitutional Law
The King v Hatahet	Criminal Law
The King v ZT	Criminal Law
Elisha v Vision Australia Ltd	Damages
Steven Moore (a pseudonym) v The King	Evidence

7: Cases Not Proceeding or Vacated

8: Special Leave Refused

2: Cases Handed Down

The following cases were handed down by the High Court of Australia during the December 2023 sittings.

Criminal Law

Hurt v The King; Hurt v The King; Delzotto v The King

C7/2023; C8/2023; S44/2023: [2024] HCA 8

Judgment delivered: 13 March 2024

Coram: Gageler CJ, Edelman, Steward, Gleeson and Jagot JJ

Catchwords:

Criminal law – Sentencing – Appeal against sentence – Minimum sentences – Where s 16AAB of Crimes Act 1914 (Cth), inserted by Crimes Legislation Amendment (Sexual Crimes Against Children and Community Protection Measures) Act 2020 (Cth) ("Amendment Act"), provided for minimum terms of imprisonment, subject to limited exceptions, for offences – Where offences included s 474.22A(1) of Criminal Code (Cth) ("Possessing or controlling child abuse material obtained or accessed using a carriage service") – Where elements of offence included, relevantly, "the person has possession or control of material" and "the person used a carriage service to obtain or access the material" – Where transitional provision in Amendment Act…

Grounds of appeal

[14] The appellant contends that the primary judge erred in finding that the respondent had discharged the onus of establishing the matters required under the relevant provision.

[15] It was submitted that his Honour failed to give adequate weight to the evidence of the second witness, and that the findings of fact were not reasonably open on the material before the Court.

[16] The respondent, for its part, submits that no error is disclosed, and that the conclusions reached were well within the range of outcomes available to the primary judge.

Consideration

[17] It is convenient to deal first with the question of construction, as the resolution of that issue informs the remaining grounds advanced by the appellant.

[18] For the reasons that follow, we are of the view that the appeal should be allowed in part and the matter remitted for further determination.

Keep reading for free

Create a free CaseChat account to read High Court Bulletin and more:

Read every judgment in full
Ask AI and get answers linked to paragraphs
See how each paragraph was cited in later cases
Download judgments as PDF or Word

Continue with Google

One click creates your free account or signs you in.

By continuing you agree to the Terms and Privacy Policy.

Details

Case: [2024] HCAB 2
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In Hurt v The King; Hurt v The King; Delzotto v The King, the High Court of Australia considered the application of minimum sentences under the Crimes Legislation Amendment (Sexual Crimes Against Children and Community Protection Measures) Act 2020. The court examined whether the minimum sentence provisions in the Crimes Act 1914 (Cth) served as a yardstick for calculating appropriate penalties and whether the "relevant conduct" in the offence encompassed the circumstances in which the conduct occurred. The court ultimately dismissed the appeals, holding that the appeals did not succeed. In The King v Anna Rowan – A Pseudonym, the court addressed the defence of duress in criminal law, specifically whether the Court of Appeal of the Supreme Court of Victoria erred in concluding that the defence of duress should have been presented to the jury. The court found that the Court of Appeal did not err in its decision, and the appeal was dismissed. Xerri v The King involved the interpretation of statutory penalties in sentencing for persistent child sexual abuse offences, focusing on the retrospective application of penalties and the meaning of "offence" under the Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999 (NSW). The High Court upheld the dismissal of the appeal, affirming the sentencing decision. Lesianawai v Minister for Immigration, Citizenship and Multicultural Affairs dealt with the cancellation of a visa based on criminal history, and the court ruled that the delegate's decision was affected by jurisdictional error due to the consideration of offences committed when the plaintiff was under 16 years of age. The court issued a writ of certiorari to quash the decision of the delegate and ordered the defendant to pay the plaintiff's costs.

Orders