Re Martin

Case [2005] WASCA 111

RE MARTIN; EX PARTE DIPANE [2005] WASCA 111



(2005) 30 WAR 164
SUPREME COURT OF WESTERN AUSTRALIACitation No:[2005] WASCA 111
THE COURT OF APPEAL (WA)
Case No:CIV:2674/200415 MARCH 2005
Coram:STEYTLER P
ROBERTS-SMITH JA
MILLER AJA		15/06/05
41Judgment Part:1 of 1
Result: Order nisi discharged
A
PDF Version
Parties:CARLO DIPANE

Catchwords:
Administrative law
Return of order nisi for writ of certiorari
Collision at sea
Fatality and injuries
Applicant charged with criminal offences of manslaughter and causing grievous bodily harm
Criminal prosecution pending
Chief Executive Officer giving notice of intention to suspend or cancel marine certificates of competency
Whether decision should have been deferred pending resolution of criminal proceedings
Administrative law
Return of order nisi for writ of certiorari
Cancellation of certificates of competency under reg 15 of WA (Certificates of Competency and Safety Manning) Regulations 1983
Obligation to give reasons
Whether reasons sufficient
Whether denial of natural justice
Whether decision unreasonable
Whether reg 15 imposed pre­conditions for exercise of discretion
Whether invalidity resulted from failure to comply with condition

Legislation:
Western Australian Marine Act 1982 (WA)
WA Marine (Certificates of Competency and Safety Manning) Regulations 1983, reg 15

Case References:
Anchor Products Ltd v Hedges (1966) 115 CLR 493
Associated Provincial Picture Houses Ltd v Wednesbury Corporation [1948] 1 KB 223
Attorney-General (NSW) v Quin (1990) 170 CLR 1
Baker v Commissioner of the Australian Federal Police (2000) 104 FCR 359
Bannister & Ors v Director-General Department of Corrective Services [2002] QSC 469
Cornelius v The King (1936) 55 CLR 235
Craig v State of South Australia (1995) 184 CLR 163
Davis v Bunn (1936) 56 CLR 246
Dietrich v The Queen (1992) 177 CLR 292
Edelsten v Richmond (1987) 11 NSWLR 51
Foster v The Queen (1993) 113 ALR 1
Hamilton v Oades (1989) 166 CLR 486
Hammond v Commonwealth of Australia (1982) 152 CLR 188
Herron v McGregor (1986) 6 NSWLR 246
Hinch v Attorney-General (Vic) (1987) 164 CLR 15
In Re Levy; Ex parte Incorporated Law Institute of New South Wales (1887) 8 LR (NSW) 347
Lee v Naismith [1990] VR 235
Martins v Racing Penalties Appeal Tribunal of Western Australia, unreported; FCt SCt of WA; Library No 970519; 10 October 1997
McDermott v The King (1948) 76 CLR 501
McMahon v Gould (1982) 7 ACLR 202
Minister for Immigration and Multicultural Affairs v Eshetu (1999) 197 CLR 611
Minister for Immigration and Multicultural Affairs v Yusuf (2001) 206 CLR 323
Mount Lawley Pty Ltd v Western Australian Planning Commission (2004) 29 WAR 273
Norilya Minerals Pty Ltd v Ireland (1991) 5 WAR 411
Project Blue Sky Inc v Australian Broadcasting Authority (1998) 194 CLR 355
Re a Solicitor (1938) 55 WN (NSW) 110
Re Croser; Ex parte Rutherford (2001) 25 WAR 170
Re Minister for Immigration and Multicultural Affairs; Ex parte Applicant S20/2002; Appellant S106/2002 v Minister for Immigration and Multicultural Affairs (2003) 198 ALR 59
Scott v London…

Continue reading Re Martin

Sign in free to access the full text

Details
AGLC
Re Martin [2005] WASCA 111
Case
[2005] WASCA 111
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The case of Re Martin involved the applicant, Martin, who had been charged with criminal offences following a collision at sea that resulted in a fatality and injuries. The Chief Executive Officer of the Department of Transport had given notice of an intention to suspend or cancel Martin's marine certificates of competency. Martin applied for a writ of certiorari to quash the decision, arguing that the decision should have been deferred pending the resolution of his criminal proceedings and that the reasons provided were insufficient, resulting in a denial of natural justice. The court was required to decide whether the decision to suspend or cancel Martin's certificates should have been deferred, whether the reasons provided were sufficient, and whether the decision was unreasonable.

The court held that the decision to suspend or cancel Martin's certificates should not have been made while his criminal proceedings were pending, as it was an administrative decision that could be influenced by the outcome of the criminal case. The court further held that the reasons provided for the decision were insufficient and did not comply with the obligation to give reasons under the relevant regulations. The court found that the decision was unreasonable as it did not take into account all relevant considerations, including the fact that Martin's criminal proceedings were pending. The court also held that the regulation did not impose preconditions for the exercise of discretion, and therefore the invalidity of the decision did not result from a failure to comply with a condition.

The order nisi was discharged, and the decision to suspend or cancel Martin's certificates was quashed. The case highlights the importance of considering all relevant factors when making administrative decisions, particularly where criminal proceedings are pending, and the need for sufficient reasons to be provided for any decision that may affect a person's livelihood.

Orders

Orders of the court

Order nisi discharged

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.