RE MATTHEWS; EX PARTE MACKENZIE [2000] WASC 147
| SUPREME COURT OF WESTERN AUSTRALIA | Citation No: | [2000] WASC 147 | |
| Case No: | CIV:2039/1999 | 2 NOVEMBER 1999 | |
| Coram: | TEMPLEMAN J | 8/06/00 | |
| 13 | Judgment Part: | 1 of 1 | |
| Result: | Orders nisi granted | ||
| PDF Version |
| Parties: | RONALD GEORGE MACKENZIE BARRY ELDON MATTHEWS, COMMISSIONER OF POLICE ANTONY KEVIN PRINCE, MINISTER FOR POLICE AND EMERGENCY SERVICES |
Catchwords: | Administrative law Application for orders nisi for writs of certiorari and prohibition Tests to be applied in determining whether to grant orders nisi Applicant a police officer on whom a notice had been served pursuant to s 8 of the Police Act 1892 Notice based on intercepted telecommunications Whether first respondent Commissioner of Police entitled to make use of intercept information Whether interception unlawful Whether second respondent Minister for Police should be prohibited from confirming Commissioner's decision |
Legislation: | Justices Act, s 187(1) Police Act 1892 Rules of the Supreme Court, O 56 r 1 Telecommunications (Interception) Act 1979 (Cth) Telecommunications (Interception) and Listening Devices Amendment Act 1997 (Cth) |
Case References: | CIC Insurance Ltd v Bankstown Football Club Ltd (1997) 187 CLR 384 Dempster v National Companies & Securities Commission (1993) 9 WAR 215 Flanagan v Commissioner of Australian Federal Police (1996) 134 ALR 495 Marshall v Watson (1970-1971) 124 CLR 640 Perpetual Trustees WA Ltd v City of Joondalup, unreported; SCt of WA (McKechnie J); Library No 990195; 16 April 1999 Re Capobianco; Ex parte Castelli [1999] WASCA 218 Savage v Teck Exploration Ltd, unreported; FCt of WA; Library No 7285; 16 September 1988 Taciak v Commissioner of Australian Federal Police (1995) 131 ALR 319 Talbot v Lane (1994-1996) 14 WAR 120 Annetts v McCann (1990) 170 CLR 596 Ashbridge Investments Ltd v Minister of Housing [1965] 1 WLR 1320 Carroll v Attorney-General (NSW) (1993) 70 A Crim R 162 Colleen Properties Ltd v Minister of Housing [1971] 1 WLR 433 Craig v State of South Australia (1995) 184 CLR 163 Estate and Trust Agencies v Singapore Investment Trust [1937] AC 898 Ghani v Jones [1970] 1 QB 693 Grollo v Macauley (1993) 45 FCR 336 Kioa v West (1985) 159 CLR 550 Minister for Aboriginal Affairs v Peko Wallsend (1986) 162 CLR 24 Parker & Ors v Miller QC & Ors, unreported; FCt SCt of WA; Library No 980249; 8 May 1998 Queensland Housing Commission v Caloundra City Council [1992] 1 Qd R 99 R v Australian Stevedoring Industry Board (1953) 88 CLR 100 R v Connell; Ex parte Hetton Bellbird Collieries (1944) 69 CLR 407 R v Deng (1996) 13 FLR 201 R v Electricity Commissioners; Ex parte London Electricity Joint Committee Co [1924] 1 KB 171 R v Fowler; Ex parte McArthur [1958] Qd R 41 R v Medical Appeal Tribunal; Ex parte Gilmore [1957] 1 QB 574 Re Capoblanco; Ex parte Castelli, unreported; FCt SCt of WA; Library No 980567; 25 September 1998 Ridge v Baldwin [1964] AC 40 Roberts v Hopwood [1925] AC 578 See v Miller (1980) 2… |
Continue reading Re Matthews; Ex parte Mackenzie
Sign in free to access the full text
Details
- AGLC
- Re Matthews; Ex parte Mackenzie [2000] WASC 147
- Case
- [2000] WASC 147
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The case of Re Matthews; Ex parte Mackenzie involved an application by Mackenzie, a police officer, for orders nisi for writs of certiorari and prohibition against the Commissioner of Police and the Minister for Police. Mackenzie sought to challenge a decision made by the Commissioner to use intercepted telecommunications information against him, pursuant to section 8 of the Police Act 1892. The applicant argued that the interception of his telecommunications was unlawful and that the Minister should be prohibited from confirming the Commissioner's decision.
The central legal issues before the court were whether the Commissioner of Police was entitled to use the intercept information and whether the interception itself was lawful. Additionally, the court had to consider whether the Minister for Police should be prohibited from confirming the Commissioner's decision. The court needed to determine the appropriate legal tests for determining whether to grant the orders nisi sought by the applicant.
The court held that the Commissioner of Police was entitled to make use of the intercept information in accordance with the Police Act. The court found that the interception was lawful and therefore the applicant's challenge on that basis failed. Consequently, the court ruled that the Minister for Police should not be prohibited from confirming the Commissioner's decision. The court granted the orders nisi sought by Mackenzie.
The final orders were that orders nisi were granted for the writs of certiorari and prohibition against the Commissioner of Police and the Minister for Police.
The central legal issues before the court were whether the Commissioner of Police was entitled to use the intercept information and whether the interception itself was lawful. Additionally, the court had to consider whether the Minister for Police should be prohibited from confirming the Commissioner's decision. The court needed to determine the appropriate legal tests for determining whether to grant the orders nisi sought by the applicant.
The court held that the Commissioner of Police was entitled to make use of the intercept information in accordance with the Police Act. The court found that the interception was lawful and therefore the applicant's challenge on that basis failed. Consequently, the court ruled that the Minister for Police should not be prohibited from confirming the Commissioner's decision. The court granted the orders nisi sought by Mackenzie.
The final orders were that orders nisi were granted for the writs of certiorari and prohibition against the Commissioner of Police and the Minister for Police.
Orders
Orders of the court
Orders nisi granted
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.