S v Boulton (Examiner, Australian Crime Commission) [2006] FCAFC 99

FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

S v Boulton (Examiner, Australian Crime Commission) [2006] FCAFC 99

EVIDENCE – appeal – spousal privilege – investigation by the Australian Crime Commission into criminal activities of the appellant's de facto spouse – appellant relied on spousal privilege – whether there is a common law privilege against spousal incrimination – whether such spousal privilege extends to de facto spouses – whether Australian Crime Commission Act 2002 (Cth) abrogates spousal privilege PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – precedents– decision of another intermediate court of appeal on question of common law followed HELD: (dismissing the appeal) the common law privilege against spousal incrimination does not extend to de facto spouses

Australian Crime Commission Act 2002 (Cth), s 30 A v Boulton (2004) 136 FCR 420, cited Australian Securities Commission v Marlborough Gold Mines Ltd (1993) 177 CLR 485, applied Callanan v B [2005] 1 Qd R 348, followed Lipohar v The Queen (1999) 200 CLR 485, discussed R v Young (1999) 46 NSWLR 681, referred to Royal Women's Hospital v Medical Practitioners Board of Victoria [2006] VSCA 85, referred to S v Boulton (2005) 155 A Crim R 152, affirmed Stoten v Sage (2005) 144 FCR 487, referred to Transurban City Link v Allan (1999) 95 FCR 553, applied J D Heydon and G Byrne, Cross on Evidence, loose leaf service, Butterworths, Australia D Lusty,"Is there a Common Law Privilege against Spouse Incrimination?" (2004) 27 UNSWLJ 1

S v WILLIAM MCLEAN BOULTON (EXAMINER, AUSTRALIAN CRIME COMMISSION) AND AUSTRALIAN CRIME COMMISSION QUD 191 of 2005 BLACK CJ, JACOBSON and GREENWOOD JJ 23 JUNE 2006 BRISBANE IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

QUEENSLAND DISTRICT REGISTRY QUD 191 of 2005

ON APPEAL FROM A SINGLE JUDGE OF THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

BETWEEN: S