Hookham v The Queen

Hookham appealed to the High Court of Australia against a conviction for a taxation offence. The appeal concerned the interpretation of provisions within the *Taxation Administration Act 1953* (Cth) and the *Crimes Act 1914* (Cth) relating to the requirement for a person convicted of an offence to make reparation for a loss.

The central legal issue before the High Court was whether the failure to remit deducted tax constituted a "loss" for the purposes of section 21B(1) of the *Crimes Act 1914* (Cth), which empowers a court to order a convicted person to make reparation for such a loss. This question arose in the context of section 8Y(1) of the *Taxation Administration Act 1953* (Cth), which deems a person concerned in the management of a corporation to have committed an offence if the corporation commits a taxation offence.

The High Court held that the failure to remit deducted tax did not, in itself, constitute a "loss" within the meaning of section 21B(1) of the *Crimes Act 1914* (Cth). The Court reasoned that the term "loss" in that section referred to a loss suffered by the victim of the offence, which in this context would be the Commonwealth. However, the failure to remit deducted tax represented a debt owed to the Commonwealth, not a loss in the sense of a depletion of assets. The Court distinguished between a debt and a loss, concluding that the statutory scheme did not equate the two for the purpose of reparation orders.

The appeal was allowed, and the order for reparation was set aside.