RE KENNEDY; EX PARTE CROZIER & ORS [2002] WASC 190

Jurisdiction:	SUPREME COURT OF WESTERN AUSTRALIA	Citation No:	[2002] WASC 190
Published:	31/07/2002
Case No:	CIV:2035/2002	Heard:	24 JULY 2002
Coram:	MURRAY J	Delivered:	24/07/02
No of pages:	10	Judgment Part:	1 of 1
Result:	Application for order nisi dismissed
Category:	B
PDF Version

Parties:	JAMES SAMUEL CROZIER "X" MATTHEW JOHN KEEGAN ROBERT ALLAN CORRY MARIANO CALZADA IAN THOMPSON OWEN HARTLEY WILLIAMS KEVIN CHARLES BAKER GEOFFREY ALEXANDER KENNEDY (PERSON), AS THE ROYAL COMMISSION INTO WHETHER THERE HAS BEEN ANY CORRUPTION OR CRIMINAL CONDUCT BY WESTERN AUSTRALIAN POLICE OFFICERS
Catchwords:	Administrative law Application for order nisi for certiorari Alleged error of law on face of record Turns on own facts
Legislation:	Royal Commissions Act 1968 (WA), s 7(1), s 19A Royal Commission (Police) Act 2002 (WA), s 12(1)
Case References:	Australian Securities Commission v Bell (1991) 104 ALR 125 National Crime Authority v A, B and D (1988) 78 ALR 707 Re Whiting [1994] 1 Qd R 561 Stockbridge v Ogilvie (1993) 43 FCR 244 Talbot v Lane (1994) 14 WAR 120 Nil

JURISDICTION : SUPREME COURT OF WESTERN AUSTRALIA

IN CHAMBERS

CITATION : RE KENNEDY; EX PARTE CROZIER & ORS [2002] WASC 190 CORAM : MURRAY J HEARD : 24 JULY 2002 DELIVERED : 24 JULY 2002 PUBLISHED : 31 JULY 2002 FILE NO/S : CIV 2035 of 2002 MATTER : Application for a Writ of Certiorari against the Royal Commission Into Whether There Has Been Any Corruption Or Criminal Conduct by Western Australian Police Officers BETWEEN : JAMES SAMUEL CROZIER

"X"

MATTHEW JOHN KEEGAN

ROBERT ALLAN CORRY

MARIANO CALZADA

IAN THOMPSON

OWEN HARTLEY WILLIAMS

KEVIN CHARLES BAKER

Applicants

AND

GEOFFREY ALEXANDER KENNEDY (PERSON), AS THE ROYAL COMMISSION INTO WHETHER THERE HAS BEEN ANY CORRUPTION OR CRIMINAL CONDUCT BY WESTERN AUSTRALIAN POLICE OFFICERS

Respondent

(Page 2)

Catchwords:

Administrative law - Application for order nisi for certiorari - Alleged error of law on face of record - Turns on own facts

Legislation:

Royal Commissions Act 1968 (WA), s 7(1), s 19A

Royal Commission (Police) Act 2002 (WA), s 12(1)

Result:

Application for order nisi dismissed

Category: B

Representation:

Counsel:

Applicants : Mr R J Davies QC & Mr J C Hammond

Respondent : Mr G T W Tannin & Mr N Bastow

Solicitors:

Applicants : Hammond Worthington

Respondent : State Crown Solicitor

Case(s) referred to in judgment(s):

Australian Securities Commission v Bell (1991) 104 ALR 125
National Crime Authority v A, B and D (1988) 78 ALR 707
Re Whiting [1994] 1 Qd R 561
Stockbridge v Ogilvie (1993) 43 FCR 244
Talbot v Lane (1994) 14 WAR 120

(Page 3)

Case(s) also cited:

Nil

(Page 4)

1 MURRAY J: This was an application for an order nisi for a writ of certiorari to quash what is described as a decision of the respondent made on 17 July 2002. The decision is described as one refusing the first and second applicant's permission to be represented by counsel of their choice,…

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 Re Kennedy

Details

AGLC: Re Kennedy [2002] WASC 190
Case: [2002] WASC 190
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The case, Re Kennedy; Ex parte Crozier & Ors, was heard by the Supreme Court of Western Australia. The applicants, police officers, sought an order nisi for certiorari to quash a decision made by the respondent, Geoffrey Alexander Kennedy, who was the Royal Commissioner into whether there had been any corruption or criminal conduct by Western Australian police officers. The applicants sought permission to be represented by counsel of their choice at private hearings of the Commission. The application for certiorari was made under the Rules of the Supreme Court 1971 (WA), O 56 r 1 to have the order nisi made returnable before the Full Court or alternatively before a single Judge. The court's task was to consider whether the applicants could show an arguable case that upon the return of the order nisi an order absolute would be made or a writ would issue. The court dismissed the application as the applicants had no arguable prospect of success for their contentions. The court held that the respondent's decision was properly informed by relevant considerations concerned with the capacity to pursue the inquiry by private hearings and it was a relevant consideration that the requirement that counsel perform the undertaking proposed to be given would or might render less effective the representation of the witnesses concerned. The court held that there was no error of law patent on the face of the record and of a kind which would cause the court on the return of an order nisi to quash the decision in question.

Orders