PEREZ -v- R [1999] WASCA 262
| (1999) 21 WAR 470 | |||
| SUPREME COURT OF WESTERN AUSTRALIA | Citation No: | [1999] WASCA 262 | |
| COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEAL | |||
| Case No: | CCA:158/1998 | 2 MARCH 1999 | |
| Coram: | PIDGEON J WALLWORK J OWEN J | 22/11/99 | |
| 26 | Judgment Part: | 1 of 1 | |
| Result: | Application for leave granted Appeal allowed | ||
| PDF Version |
| Parties: | JUAN ANTONIO ARGIBAY PEREZ THE QUEEN |
Catchwords: | Criminal law Practice and procedure Federal fishing offences Fine imposed on foreign national Principles of sentencing Whether consideration of offender's ability to pay fine Whether fine should be reduced Fisheries Foreign nationals fishing commercially without licence in Australian fishing zone Substantial fines imposed Whether offender's means to pay taken into account in imposing fine Fine excessive |
Legislation: | Fisheries Management Act 1991 (Cth) s 100, s 101 |
Case References: | Cheatley v The Queen (1972) 127 CLR 291 Chiou Yaou Fa v Morris (1987) 87 FLR 36 Flego v Lanham (1983) 32 SASR 361 Fraser v R (1985) 63 ALR 103 Fry v Bassett (1986) 85 FLR 334 Gallagher v Durack (1983) 45 ALR 53 Hinch v Attorney General [1987] VR 721 R v Repacholi (1990) 52 A Crim R 49 R v Thompson [1989] WAR 219 R v Thompson [1989] WAR 219 Rahme v The Queen (1989) 43 A Crim R 81 Re Director of Public Prosecutions, Ex parte Lawler (1994) 179 CLR 270 Repacholi v R (1990) 52 A Crim R 49 Sgroi v The Queen (1989) 40 A Crim R 197 Sgroi v The Queen (1989) 40 A Crim R 197 Akimin & Ors v Cooper, unreported; SCt of WA (Heenan J); Library No 950071; 24 February 1995 Chen Yin Ten v Little (1976) 28 FLR 480 Fang Chinn FA v Puffett (1978) 22 ALR 149 Gayfer v Bere & Bakuama, unreported; SCt of WA (Parker J); Library No 980360; 24 June 1998 King v Pavlos, unreported; SCt of WA; Library No 970493; 22 September 1997 La Ode Arifin v Ostle, unreported; FCt of WA; Library No 8923; 18 June 1991 Liang v Mellon (1981) 12 NTR 9 Mitchell v Abas & Ors, unreported; SCt of WA (Wallwork J); Library No 980185; 9 April 1998 Plwang Ming Heui v Mellon (1980) 5 NTR 9 R v Kakura & Sato, unreported; SCt of NSW (Wood J); Library No 70178/90; 21 September 1990 R v Santome & Paz, unreported; DCt of WA; 14 October 1998 Tae Chang Fisheries Co Ltd v Morris (1990) 102 FLR 212 The Queen v Sabrudin, unreported; SCt of NT (Angel J); Library No S97/65; 7 February 1997 |
JURISDICTION : SUPREME COURT OF WESTERN AUSTRALIA TITLE OF COURT : COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEAL CITATION : PEREZ -v- R [1999] WASCA 262 CORAM : PIDGEON J
- WALLWORK J
OWEN J
- Applicant
AND
THE QUEEN
Respondent
Catchwords:
Criminal law - Practice and procedure - Federal fishing…
Continue reading Perez v The Queen
Sign in free to access the full text
Details
- AGLC
- Perez v The Queen [1999] WASCA 262
- Case
- [1999] WASCA 262
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
In the case of Perez v The Queen, the appellant, Perez, was convicted for engaging in commercial fishing activities within the Australian fishing zone without the required licence. The case was heard and decided by the High Court of Australia. Perez, a foreign national, was issued substantial fines for his illegal fishing activities. Perez appealed against the fines imposed, arguing that they were excessive and that his ability to pay was not adequately considered by the lower court. The central legal issue before the court was whether the lower court had appropriately considered the appellant's means to pay when determining the fines imposed. The court was also required to determine whether the fines were excessive under the relevant legislation.
The court held that the lower court had failed to adequately consider Perez's capacity to pay the fines. The court emphasised the importance of taking into account an offender's ability to pay when imposing fines, particularly in cases involving foreign nationals. The court found that the fines imposed on Perez were excessive, given his financial circumstances. The court concluded that the lower court had not appropriately exercised its discretion in determining the amount of the fines and that the fines imposed were not proportionate to the offence committed. The court allowed the appeal and remitted the matter back to the lower court for reconsideration of the fines, with proper regard to Perez's ability to pay.
The court granted Perez leave to appeal and allowed the appeal, ordering that the matter be remitted to the lower court for reconsideration of the fines imposed. The lower court was directed to take into account Perez's financial means and capacity to pay when determining the appropriate amount of the fines. This decision underscores the importance of considering an offender's ability to pay when imposing fines, particularly in cases involving foreign nationals.
The court held that the lower court had failed to adequately consider Perez's capacity to pay the fines. The court emphasised the importance of taking into account an offender's ability to pay when imposing fines, particularly in cases involving foreign nationals. The court found that the fines imposed on Perez were excessive, given his financial circumstances. The court concluded that the lower court had not appropriately exercised its discretion in determining the amount of the fines and that the fines imposed were not proportionate to the offence committed. The court allowed the appeal and remitted the matter back to the lower court for reconsideration of the fines, with proper regard to Perez's ability to pay.
The court granted Perez leave to appeal and allowed the appeal, ordering that the matter be remitted to the lower court for reconsideration of the fines imposed. The lower court was directed to take into account Perez's financial means and capacity to pay when determining the appropriate amount of the fines. This decision underscores the importance of considering an offender's ability to pay when imposing fines, particularly in cases involving foreign nationals.
Orders
Orders of the court
Application for leave granted
Appeal allowed
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.