Jack Denis Mulder v Commonwealth Director of Public Prosecutions Jack Denis Mulder v Commonwealth Director of Public Prosecutions

[2015] HCASL 143

JACK DENIS MULDER

v

COMMONWEALTH DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC PROSECUTIONS

JACK DENIS MULDER

v

COMMONWEALTH DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC PROSECUTIONS & ANOR

[2015] HCASL 143
S87/2015
S88/2015

1. On 10 May 2012, the applicant was convicted before the Local Court of New South Wales of one count of dishonestly obtaining an Australian passport, seven counts of improperly using an Australian passport to obtain identification, open bank accounts and to travel to and from Australia, and five counts of receiving a designated service using a false name, contrary to ss 32(2) and 35(1) of the Australian Passports Act 2005 (Cth) and s 140(1) of the Anti-Money Laundering and Counter-Terrorism Financing Act 2006 (Cth).

2. On 27 March 2013, Hock DCJ dismissed an appeal by way of rehearing against those convictions.  The judge found that the applicant's evidence was implausible and unreliable and that it was established beyond reasonable doubt that it was the applicant who had conducted the transactions which comprised the offences.

3. On 17 February 2014, the applicant was convicted before the Local Court of a count of giving false or misleading information to specified persons or entities by giving false information to a reporting entity, contrary to s 136(1) of the Anti-Money Laundering and Counter-Terrorism Financing Act.

4. On 26 August 2014, Toner DCJ dismissed an appeal by way of rehearing from that conviction.  His Honour found that the offence was proved beyond reasonable doubt.

5. On 10 April 2015, the Court of Appeal of the Supreme Court of New South Wales (Ward and Gleeson JJA and Johnson J) dismissed applications pursuant to s 69 of the Supreme Court Act 1970 (NSW) to set aside the decisions of Hock DCJ and Toner DCJ on the ground of jurisdictional error.

6. The applicant now seeks special leave to appeal against the orders of the Court of Appeal. As the applicant is not legally represented, each application falls to be dealt with under r 41.10 of the High Court Rules 2004.

7. The applicant has not advanced any reason to doubt the correctness of the conclusions reached by the Court of Appeal.  An appeal to this Court would have no prospect of success.

8. Pursuant to r 41.10.5 we direct the Registrar to draw up, sign and seal orders dismissing each application.

G.A.A. Nettle
3 September 2015 M.M. Gordon