RE WOODS; EX PARTE BRAYSICH [2004] WASCA 120
| (2004) 28 WAR 530 | |||
| SUPREME COURT OF WESTERN AUSTRALIA | Citation No: | [2004] WASCA 120 | |
| THE FULL COURT (WA) | |||
| Case No: | CIV:1851/2003 | 14 MAY 2004 | |
| Coram: | MURRAY J TEMPLEMAN J MCLURE J | 11/06/04 | |
| 16 | Judgment Part: | 1 of 1 | |
| Result: | Order nisi for prohibition discharged | ||
| A | |||
| PDF Version |
| Parties: | JEFFREY JOSEPH BRAYSICH AUSTRALIAN SECURITIES AND INVESTMENTS COMMISSION |
Catchwords: | Prerogative writs Prohibition Prosecutions for creating false or misleading appearance of trading in securities on a stock market Committal proceedings Whether Magistrate has jurisdiction Whether offence "committed, begun or completed" in WA |
Legislation: | Commonwealth Constitution, s 80 Corporations Act 2001 (Cth), s 998, s 1338B(8) Criminal Code 1913 (WA) Criminal Law (Procedure) Amendment Act 2002 (WA) Customs Act 1901 (Cth), s 233B Justices Act 1902 (WA) |
Case References: | Lipohar v R (1999) 200 CLR 485 North v Marra Developments Ltd (1981) 148 CLR 42 R v O'Halloran (2000) 182 ALR 431 R v Perfili (1995) 84 A Crim R 26. , R v Toubya [1993] 1 VR 226. , Re Woods; Ex P Braysich [2003] WASC 143 Thompson v R (1989) 169 CLR 1 Thompson v The Queen (1989) 169 CLR 1 ASC v Nomura International PLC (1999) 17 ACLC 55 Christianos v Young (1990) 3 WAR 303 Craig v State of South Australia (1995) 184 CLR 163 Dow Jones & Co Inc v Gutnick (2002) 77 ALJR 255 DPP v Sutcliffe [2001] VSC 43 Fame Decorator Agencies Pty Ltd v Jefferies Industries Ltd (1998) 16 ACLC 1235 John Pfeiffer Pty Ltd v Rogerson (2000) 203 CLR 503 King-Brooks v Roberts (1991) 5 WAR 500 Lamb v Moss (1983) 76 FLR 296 Macks and Emanuel (No 14) Pty Ltd v Blacklaw & Shadforth Pty Ltd (1997) 15 ACLC 1099 Prentice v St George Bank Ltd (2002) 20 ACLC 923 R v Australian Stevedoring Industry Board; Ex parte Melbourne Stevedoring Co Pty Ltd (1953) 88 CLR 100 R v Iorlano (1983) 151 CLR 678 Re His Honour Judge Hammond; Ex parte Roddan (1996) 17 WAR 50 Re Robins SM; Ex parte West Australian Newspapers Ltd (1999) 20 WAR 511 Regie National des Usines Renault SA v Zhang (2002) 76 ALJR 551 Sankey v Whitlam (1978) 142 CLR 1 Ward v The Queen (1980) 142 CLR 308 Yates v Wilson (1989) 168 CLR 338 |
JURISDICTION : SUPREME COURT OF WESTERN AUSTRALIA TITLE OF COURT : THE FULL COURT (WA) CITATION : RE WOODS; EX PARTE BRAYSICH [2004] WASCA 120 CORAM : MURRAY J
- TEMPLEMAN J
MCLURE J
JEFFREY JOSEPH BRAYSICH
Applicant
AND
AUSTRALIAN SECURITIES AND INVESTMENTS COMMISSION
Respondent
Catchwords:
Prerogative writs - Prohibition - Prosecutions for creating false or misleading appearance of trading in…
Continue reading Re Woods
Sign in free to access the full text
Details
- AGLC
- Re Woods [2004] WASCA 120
- Case
- [2004] WASCA 120
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The case of Re Woods involved the applicant, Woods, seeking a prerogative writ of prohibition to prevent a magistrate in Western Australia from proceeding with the committal of Woods for alleged offences under section 1041H of the Corporations Act. The central issue was whether the magistrate had jurisdiction over the matter, specifically whether the alleged offence had been committed, begun, or completed within Western Australia. The application was heard in the High Court of Australia.
The legal issue before the court was whether the magistrate had the requisite jurisdiction to hear the committal proceedings for the alleged offences. Woods contended that the alleged offence, creating a false or misleading appearance of trading in securities, was not committed in Western Australia. The court needed to determine whether the jurisdiction of the magistrate was correctly established by the location where the alleged offence occurred. The court also needed to consider whether the offence was sufficiently connected to Western Australia to confer jurisdiction on the magistrate.
The court held that the magistrate did not have jurisdiction over the matter. The court reasoned that for the offence to be within the jurisdiction of the magistrate, it must have been committed, begun, or completed in Western Australia. The court found that the alleged offence did not occur in Western Australia, and therefore, the magistrate lacked the requisite jurisdiction to proceed with the committal. Consequently, the court granted the writ of prohibition, preventing the magistrate from proceeding with the committal proceedings. However, the order nisi for prohibition was later discharged, effectively dismissing Woods' application.
The legal issue before the court was whether the magistrate had the requisite jurisdiction to hear the committal proceedings for the alleged offences. Woods contended that the alleged offence, creating a false or misleading appearance of trading in securities, was not committed in Western Australia. The court needed to determine whether the jurisdiction of the magistrate was correctly established by the location where the alleged offence occurred. The court also needed to consider whether the offence was sufficiently connected to Western Australia to confer jurisdiction on the magistrate.
The court held that the magistrate did not have jurisdiction over the matter. The court reasoned that for the offence to be within the jurisdiction of the magistrate, it must have been committed, begun, or completed in Western Australia. The court found that the alleged offence did not occur in Western Australia, and therefore, the magistrate lacked the requisite jurisdiction to proceed with the committal. Consequently, the court granted the writ of prohibition, preventing the magistrate from proceeding with the committal proceedings. However, the order nisi for prohibition was later discharged, effectively dismissing Woods' application.
Orders
Orders of the court
Order nisi for prohibition 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.