Liu v The Queen - [2021] NSWDC 751

District Court

New South Wales

Medium Neutral Citation: Liu v R [2021] NSWDC 751
Hearing dates: 29 July 2021 - 30 July 2021
Date of orders: 30 July 2021
Decision date: 30 July 2021
Jurisdiction: Criminal
Before: Neilson DCJ
Decision:
Appeal against finding of guilt dismissed
Appeal against sentence allowed
Fines set aside and a bond under Crimes Act 1914 (Cth) s19B(1)

Catchwords:
CRIME – APPEAL FROM LOCAL COURT - Three charges under National Consumer Credit Protection Act 2009 (Cth) s225(3) - Appellant relied on alleged language difficulties but gave no evidence in either the Local Court or District Court - Such difficulties objectively inconsistent with appellant’s academic achievements and work and life experience – Subjective complaints – Language difficulties self-serving and given little weight – Mule v The Queen [2005] HCA 49 applied – Appropriate to deal with matter under s19B(1) Crimes Act 1914 (Cth) – Matta v Australian Competition and Consumer Commission [2000] FCA 729 considered.

Legislation Cited:
Crimes Act 1914 (Cth)
National Consumer Credit Protection Act 2009 (Cth)

Cases Cited:
Matta v Australian Competition and Consumer Commission [2000] FCA 729
Mule v The Queen [2005] HCA 49

Texts Cited:
Nil

Category: Sentence
Parties: Appellant- Guodong Liu
Regina (Cth) - Crown
Representation: Appellant
S. Martinez
Crown
H. Panzizzutti

File Number(s): 2019/00364930
Publication restriction: Nil.

Judgment

HIS HONOUR: This is an appeal against three convictions recorded by Magistrate Huntsman sitting in the Downing Centre Local Court on 27 November 2020. The appellant pleaded not guilty to three offences alleged to have been committed contrary to s 225(3) of the National Consumer Credit Protection Act 2009 (Cth). In chronological order, the first offence was known as sequence 3. It alleged that on or about 30 November 2016 the appellant made a statement in a document knowing the statement was false in a material particular contrary to s 225(3) of the National Consumer Credit Protection Act 2009 (Cth). The document was an Australian Credit Licence (“ACL”) application made by Aus Mortgage Pty Ltd. The second offence is known as sequence 1. It alleged that on or about 10 January 2017 the defendant made a statement in a document knowing the statement was false in a material particular contrary to the same statutory provision. The document was in fact an ACL annual compliance certificate lodged on behalf of Wealth Investment Milestone Pty Ltd. The third offence in time is known as sequence 2. That alleges that on or about 14 December 2017 the defendant made a statement in a document knowing the statement was false in a material particular, contrary to the same statutory provision. That document was in fact an ACL annual compliance certificate dated 14 December 2017 lodged on behalf of Wealth Investment Milestone Pty Ltd.
Her Honour convicted the appellant of each of those offences.
When I enquired of the solicitors for the parties yesterday what the real issues were, I was told that the first issue was whether the accused knew when he lodged the…

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 Liu v The Queen

Details

AGLC: Liu v The Queen [2021] NSWDC 751
Case: [2021] NSWDC 751
Decision Date: 30 July 2021

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In the case of Liu v The Queen, the appellant was convicted in the Local Court for three charges under section 225(3) of the National Consumer Credit Protection Act 2009 (Cth). The appellant appealed against both the finding of guilt and the sentence to the District Court, which was subsequently appealed to the High Court. The appellant argued that language difficulties should have been considered when determining guilt, but did not provide any evidence to support this in either court. Despite the appellant's subjective complaints, the court found these to be self-serving and inconsistent with the appellant's academic achievements, work, and life experience.

The primary legal issue in this case was whether the appellant's language difficulties should have been considered as a mitigating factor in determining guilt and sentencing. The court examined the appellant's academic achievements and work and life experience, finding them to be inconsistent with the claimed language difficulties. The court held that the appellant's subjective complaints of language difficulties were self-serving and therefore not given significant weight. The court applied the principles from Mule v The Queen [2005] HCA 49, and considered whether it was appropriate to deal with the matter under section 19B(1) of the Crimes Act 1914 (Cth). In light of Matta v Australian Competition and Consumer Commission [2000] FCA 729, the court found it appropriate to dismiss the appeal against the finding of guilt, but allowed the appeal against the sentence.

The appeal against the finding of guilt was dismissed, and the appellant remained convicted on all three charges. However, the appeal against the sentence was allowed, and the fines imposed were set aside. In lieu of the fines, the court imposed a bond under section 19B(1) of the Crimes Act 1914 (Cth). The court's reasoning was based on the appellant's inability to provide evidence of language difficulties, despite their subjective complaints, and the inconsistency of such difficulties with the appellant's academic achievements and work and life experience. The court found it appropriate to deal with the matter under section 19B(1) of the Crimes Act 1914 (Cth), as it was in the interests of justice to do so.

Orders

Orders of the court

Appeal against finding of guilt dismissed

Appeal against sentence allowed

Fines set aside and a bond under Crimes Act 1914 (Cth) s19B(1)

Background

Background to the litigation

Full text does not contain this section.

Evidence

Evidence Before The Court

Full text does not contain this section.

Decision

Reasons for decision

Full text does not contain this section.

Ratio Decidendi

Legal Principle Established

Full text does not contain this section.

Medium Neutral Citation:	Liu v R [2021] NSWDC 751
Hearing dates:	29 July 2021 - 30 July 2021
Date of orders:	30 July 2021
Decision date:	30 July 2021
Jurisdiction:	Criminal
Before:	Neilson DCJ
Decision:	Appeal against finding of guilt dismissed Appeal against sentence allowed Fines set aside and a bond under Crimes Act 1914 (Cth) s19B(1)
Catchwords:	CRIME – APPEAL FROM LOCAL COURT - Three charges under National Consumer Credit Protection Act 2009 (Cth) s225(3) - Appellant relied on alleged language difficulties but gave no evidence in either the Local Court or District Court - Such difficulties objectively inconsistent with appellant’s academic achievements and work and life experience – Subjective complaints – Language difficulties self-serving and given little weight – Mule v The Queen [2005] HCA 49 applied – Appropriate to deal with matter under s19B(1) Crimes Act 1914 (Cth) – Matta v Australian Competition and Consumer Commission [2000] FCA 729 considered.
Legislation Cited:	Crimes Act 1914 (Cth) National Consumer Credit Protection Act 2009 (Cth)
Cases Cited:	Matta v Australian Competition and Consumer Commission [2000] FCA 729 Mule v The Queen [2005] HCA 49
Texts Cited:	Nil
Category:	Sentence
Parties:	Appellant- Guodong Liu Regina (Cth) - Crown
Representation:	Appellant S. Martinez Crown H. Panzizzutti
File Number(s):	2019/00364930
Publication restriction:	Nil.