Vickers, Michael v Minister for Business & Consumers Affairs

Re: MICHAEL VICKERS
And: MINISTER FOR BUSINESS AND CONSUMER AFFAIRS; COMPTROLLER-GENERAL OF
CUSTOMS; T. YOUNG; FRANCIS IVOR KELLY (1982) 65 FLR 260
No. G111 of 1981
Administrative Law - Customs - Banks and Banking

COURT

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

NEW SOUTH WALES DISTRICT REGISTRY
GENERAL DIVISION
Morling J.(1)

CATCHWORDS

Administrative Law - seizure of money from applicant by Customs officers - money alleged to be proceeds of sale of illegally imported narcotics - bank notes seized - whether reasonably suspected of being proceeds of sale of narcotics - applicant's savings bank account in credit - allegation that moneys deposited to credit of account were proceeds of sale of narcotics - whether bank credit is "goods" - whether bank credit is "moneys in the form of cash" - money standing to credit of account seized from bank - applicant charged with offence under Customs Act - acquitted - demand for repayment of seized money - refusal to repay - whether bank credit acquired "by reason of" sale of drugs - whether applicant entitled to return of money.

Customs Act 1901 (Cth) ss. 203-209, 229 and 229A

Administrative Decisions (Judicial Review) Act 1977 (Cth) s.5

Customs - Forfeited goods - Administrative decision to seize goods - Seizure - Banknotes - Whether "reasonable cause to believe" forfeited - Money standing to credit of bank account - Chose in action - Whether "goods" - Whether "movable personal property" - Customs Act 1901 (Cth), ss. 4, 203, 229A.

Administrative Law - Customs - Forfeited goods - Administrative decision to seize goods - Banknotes - Money standing to credit of bank account - Review - Whether decisions authorized - Administrative Decisions (Judicial Review) Act 1977 (Cth), ss. 5, 16(1)(d).

Banks and Banking - Customs - Forfeited goods - Seizure of money standing to credit of bank account - Legal character - Chose in action - Whether "goods" - Whether "movable personal property" - Customs Act 1901 (Cth), ss. 4, 203, 229A.

HEADNOTE

Section 229A of the Customs Act 1901 provides, inter alia, that money in the form of cash or goods which comes into the possession or under the control of a person by reason of his selling or otherwise dealing in narcotic goods imported into Australia in contravention of the Customs Act 1901 are deemed forfeited goods. Section 4(1) defines "goods" as all kinds of "movable personal property" and by s. 203 any officer of customs may seize any forfeited goods or "goods which he has reasonable cause to believe are forfeited".

Upon decisions taken by the respondents under the Customs Act 1901, $8,000 in banknotes was seized from the applicant's possession and $15,000 standing to the credit of the applicant's account with the bank was seized from that bank. The applicant was later acquitted of a charge of illegally importing narcotics into Australia and challenged the decisions as not authorized by the Customs Act 1901.

Held: (1) The decisions of which complaint was made were clearly decisions of an administrative character and…

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Vickers, Michael, sought judicial review of a decision by the Minister for Business & Consumers Affairs and Customs officers to seize $15,000 from his savings account, alleging it was proceeds of the sale of illegal narcotics. The court was tasked with determining whether the seizure was lawful and whether the applicant was entitled to the return of the seized funds. The primary issues involved the interpretation of statutory provisions and the application of administrative law principles to determine the validity of the seizure and the status of the bank credit as "goods" or "moneys in the form of cash." The court found that the seizure was unlawful because the bank credit did not constitute "moneys in the form of cash" as defined by the Customs Act. Consequently, the court set aside the decision to seize the funds and ordered that three-quarters of the applicant's costs be paid by the respondents. The decision could be appealed within 21 days, after which the exhibits would be returned to the original producers if no appeal was lodged. The first and second respondents were dismissed by consent.

Orders of the court

1. The decision of the thirdnamed respondent to seize Fifteen thousand dollars ($15,000.00) being moneys contained in Account No.24694 at the Mosman Branch of the Bank of New South Wales Savings Bank Limited be set aside.

2. The third and fourthnamed respondents pay to the applicant three-quarters of his costs of these proceedings.

3. Execution of proceedings hereunder be stayed for 21 days from the date hereof and, if an appeal to the Full Court of this Court be instituted within such time, until the disposal of such appeal or further order of this Court.

4. Unless an appeal to the Full Court of this Court be instituted within 21 days from the date hereof, the exhibits herein, be returned, after 21 days from the date hereof, to the persons by whom they were produced.

5. The first and second respondents are, by consent, dismissed from the proceedings. Decision to seize the sum of $15,000 set aside.

Respondents to pay three-quarters of the applicant's costs.

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established