STATUTORY RULES.
1930. No. 147.
REGULATIONS UNDER THE SERVICE AND EXECUTION OF PROCESS ACT 1901-1928.
I, THE person administering the Government of the Commonwealth of Australia, with the advice of the Federal Executive Council, hereby make the following Regulations under the Service and Execution of Process Act 1901-1928, to come into operation forthwith.
Dated this ninth day of December, One thousand nine hundred and thirty.
SOMERS
Administering the Government of the
Commonwealth of Australia.
By His Excellency’s Command,
JNO. J. DALY
Acting Attorney-General.
Amendment of Service and Execution of Process Regulations.
(Statutory Rules 1925, No. 105.)
1. Regulation 2 of the Service and Execution of Process Regulations is amended by adding at the end thereof the following proviso:—
“Provided further that, in the application of the Act, section eighteen of the Act shall be read as if after sub-section (4.) there were inserted the following sub-sections:—
‘(4a.) Where any person has been brought before a Justice of the Peace by virtue of a warrant executed under this section and the Justice of the Peace, or a Judge, has, pursuant to the provisions of this section, made an order for the return, admittance to bail or discharge of that person, such that the person is not, or may not be, required to be returned within three months from the date of the order to the State or part of the Commonwealth in which the warrant was issued, a Justice of the High Court sitting in chambers shall, upon application for a review of the order being made to him, have jurisdiction to review the order.
‘(4b.) Any such review shall be by way of rehearing and any evidence in addition to or in substitution for the evidence given on the making of such order may be given on or in connexion with such review. On any such review a copy of any public document or copy of any document filed in any Department or office of the Commonwealth or of any State or of the Mandated Territory of New Guinea duly certified as a true copy of any such document by the person purporting by such certificate to have charge of such document shall be received in evidence of the facts stated in such copy.
‘(4c.) Upon the review of any such order the Justice may confirm or vary the order, or quash the order and substitute a new order in its stead.
‘(4d.) The order as confirmed or varied, or, in the event of an order being substituted, the order substituted, shall be executed according to its tenor as if it had been made by the Justice of the Peace or the Judge.”
By Authority: H. J. Green, Government Printer, Canberra.
Overview
The Service and Execution of Process Act 1901-1928 was enacted to address the need for streamlined and efficient processes in the service and execution of legal documents and warrants across the Commonwealth of Australia. These regulations were introduced to ensure that legal orders, particularly those made by Justices of the Peace and Judges, are properly executed and overseen. The regulations were made by the person administering the Government of the Commonwealth of Australia, with the advice of the Federal Executive Council, and they came into operation immediately. The policy objective is to provide a mechanism for the review of orders made under the Act, ensuring that any potential errors or injustices can be rectified in a timely and effective manner. The amendments to the Service and Execution of Process Regulations, introduced in Statutory Rules 1930, No. 147, specifically provide for the review of orders by a Justice of the High Court sitting in chambers, allowing for additional evidence to be considered and ensuring that the final order is executed properly.
Scope and Application
The Service and Execution of Process Regulations, as amended by these Statutory Rules, apply to all persons and entities involved in the process of serving and executing legal documents within the Commonwealth of Australia. This includes warrants, subpoenas, and other legal instruments. The Regulations extend their jurisdiction across all states and territories of Australia, ensuring uniformity in the service and execution of legal processes nationwide. Certain exclusions and thresholds may apply, particularly regarding the specific circumstances under which a Justice of the High Court may review an order made by a Justice of the Peace or a Judge. Additionally, the application of these Regulations can be further extended or restricted through subordinate instruments, allowing for necessary adjustments and refinements to ensure the smooth functioning of legal processes.
Key Provisions
The primary operative sections of these Regulations, under the Service and Execution of Process Act 1901-1928, primarily focus on the amendment of Regulation 2, introducing new sub-sections (4a) to (4d). These sub-sections provide a mechanism for the review of certain orders made by Justices of the Peace or Judges regarding individuals brought before them under a warrant. Specifically, they allow a Justice of the High Court sitting in chambers to review an order where the individual is not required to be returned to the issuing State or Commonwealth within three months. This review is by way of rehearing and allows for the introduction of new evidence. The Justice may then confirm, vary, or quash the order, and substitute a new one if necessary (Regulation 2).
These Regulations impose several obligations on the parties involved. For instance, they require that any person brought before a Justice of the Peace under a warrant must have their case reviewed by a Justice of the High Court if they are not required to be returned to the issuing State or Commonwealth within three months. This review process must be conducted as a rehearing, allowing for the presentation of additional or substitute evidence. The Justice of the High Court must then either confirm, vary, or quash the original order, potentially substituting a new order if necessary (Regulation 2). These requirements ensure a formal and thorough review process is in place to assess the validity and appropriateness of the initial order made by the Justice of the Peace or Judge.
Failure to comply with these Regulations may result in legal consequences. While the specific offences and penalties are not detailed within the text of these Regulations, breaches of the Service and Execution of Process Act 1901-1928 could potentially lead to both civil and criminal penalties. Civil penalties could include fines or other monetary sanctions, while criminal penalties could involve imprisonment or other forms of punishment, depending on the nature and severity of the breach. The exact penalties would be determined in accordance with the broader provisions of the Act and any relevant case law.
In summary, these Regulations amend the Service and Execution of Process Regulations to introduce a structured review process for certain orders made by Justices of the Peace or Judges. They impose clear obligations on the parties involved, ensuring that individuals whose cases meet specific criteria have their orders reviewed by a Justice of the High Court. Breaches of these Regulations could result in significant legal consequences, including potential fines or imprisonment, though the exact penalties would be governed by the overarching Act and applicable legal standards.