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: Cases Handed Down
2: Cases Reserved
3: Original Jurisdiction
4: Special Leave Granted
5: Cases Not Proceeding or Vacated
6: Special Leave Refused

Summary of New Entries

1: Cases Handed Down

Case	Title
Magaming v The Queen	Constitutional Law
Lee & Anor v New South Wales Crime Commission	Criminal Law
Bugmy v The Queen	Criminal Law
Munda v The State of Western Australia	Criminal Law

2: Cases Reserved

Case	Title
Expense Reduction Analysts Group Pty Ltd & Ors v Armstrong Strategic Management and Marketing Pty Limited & Ors	Civil Procedure
BCM v The Queen	Criminal Law
Karpany & Anor v Dietman	Native Title
Daly v Thiering & Ors	Statutes

3: Original Jurisdiction

Case	Title
There are no new matters ready for hearing in the original jurisdiction of the High Court.

4: Special Leave Granted

Case	Title
Attorney-General for the Northern Territory & Anor v Emmerson & Anor	Constitutional Law
ADCO Constructions Pty Ltd v Goudappel & Anor	Statutes
Thiess v Collector of Customs & Ors	Statutes
Moseley v Director of Public Prosecutions	Supreme Court Practice

1: Cases Handed Down

The following cases were handed down by the High Court of Australia during the October 2013 sittings.

Constitutional Law

Magaming v The Queen

S58/2013: [2013] HCA 40.

Judgment delivered: 11 October 2013.

Coram: French CJ, Hayne, Crennan, Kiefel, Bell, Gageler and Keane JJ.

Catchwords:

Constitutional law – Judicial power of the Commonwealth – Constitution, Ch III – Appellant crew member of boat carrying passengers with no lawful right to come to Australia – Appellant convicted of aggravated offence of smuggling group of at least five non-citizens reckless as to whether they had lawful right to enter Australia under s 233C(1) of Migration Act 1958 ("Act") – Section 236B of Act prescribed mandatory minimum sentence for offence under s 233C(1) of five years' imprisonment with minimum non-parole period of three years – Whether ss 233A(1) and 233C(1) coextensive – Whether prescription of mandatory minimum sentence for offence under s 233C(1) conferred judicial power to determine punishment on prosecuting authorities – Whether s 236B incompatible with institutional integrity of courts – Whether s 236B required court to impose arbitrary and non-judicial sentence.
Words and phrases – "aggravated offence", "institutional integrity", "judicial power", "mandatory minimum penalty", "prosecutorial discretion".

Appealed from NSWSC (CCA): [2013] NSWCCA 23.

Held: (6-1) Appeal dismissed.

Return to Top

Criminal Law

Bugmy v The Queen

S16/2013: [2013] HCA 37.

Judgment delivered: 2 October 2013.

Coram: French CJ, Hayne, Crennan, Kiefel, Bell, Gageler and Keane JJ.

Catchwords:

Criminal law – Appeal – Prosecution appeal against sentence – Where sole ground of appeal manifest inadequacy – Where appellate court…

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.

Continue reading High Court Bulletin

Details

AGLC: High Court Bulletin [2013] HCAB 8
Case: [2013] HCAB 8
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The High Court handed down a number of decisions in October 2013. The first decision was in the matter of Magaming v The Queen. The court was required to decide whether certain sections of the Migration Act 1958 were compatible with the institutional integrity of the court. The court held that the sections did not breach the institutional integrity of the courts. The second decision was in the matter of Bugmy v The Queen. The court was required to decide whether the sentencing principles applied by the NSW Court of Criminal Appeal were correct. The court held that the NSW Court of Criminal Appeal had failed to give appropriate weight to the appellant’s deprived background and should have taken into account the unique circumstances of Aboriginal offenders and the high rate of incarceration of Aboriginal Australians when sentencing the appellant. The third decision was in the matter of Munda v The State of Western Australia. The court was required to decide whether the sentencing principles applied by the NSW Court of Criminal Appeal were correct. The court held that the NSW Court of Criminal Appeal had failed to exercise its residual discretion when resentencing the appellant. The final decision was in the matter of Lee & Anor v New South Wales Crime Commission. The court was required to decide whether the New South Wales Crime Commission had the power to examine a person charged with offences under s 31D of the Criminal Assets Recovery Act 1990 (NSW). The court held that the New South Wales Crime Commission did not have the power to examine a person charged with offences under s 31D of the Criminal Assets Recovery Act 1990 (NSW).

Orders