Michael Murray v The Chief Examiner

In the matter of Michael Murray v The Chief Examiner, the applicant sought to appeal against his conviction and sentence imposed under the Major Crime (Investigative Powers) Act 2004. Murray was convicted of contempt of the Chief Examiner after he refused to be sworn during an investigation into serious organised crime offences. The Chief Examiner found Murray in contempt under s 49(1) of the Act, and he was subsequently sentenced to eight months' imprisonment. Murray appealed both the conviction and the sentence, arguing that the Chief Examiner was required to administer an oath and that the sentence was manifestly excessive.

The legal issues before the court were whether the Chief Examiner was obligated to attempt to administer an oath to Murray and whether the Chief Examiner was required to identify the terms of the oath and affirmation. Additionally, Murray argued that the sentence imposed was manifestly excessive, particularly given his adherence to a 'code of silence' and the purpose of the Major Crime (Investigative Powers) Act 2004, which is to facilitate the obtaining of evidence about serious organised crime offences. The court examined the relevant provisions of the Act and considered the case law, including the decision in Fehon v Domican, to determine the obligations of the Chief Examiner and the appropriate sentence in this context.

The court held that the Chief Examiner was not required to administer an oath to Murray, as s 36 of the Act does not impose such a duty. The court also determined that the sentence imposed was not manifestly excessive, taking into account Murray's adherence to a 'code of silence', his relevant prior conviction, and the restrictive management regime in place during his incarceration. The court distinguished Fehon v Domican on the basis that the present case involved a refusal to be sworn rather than an objection to the terms of an oath. Consequently, Murray's appeal was dismissed, and leave to appeal was refused.

The court made no orders regarding costs.