Stewart v Australian Crime Commission [2012] FCAFC 151

FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

Stewart v Australian Crime Commission [2012] FCAFC 151 Citation: Stewart v Australian Crime Commission [2012] FCAFC 151

Appeal from: Australian Crime Commission v Stewart [2012] FCA 29

Parties: ANTHONY STEWART, JOHN CORNELL, PAUL HOGAN and RIMFIRE FILMS PTY LIMITED v AUSTRALIAN CRIME COMMISSION

File number: NSD 216 of 2012

Judges: BESANKO, JAGOT AND BROMBERG JJ

Date of judgment: 29 October 2012

Catchwords: APPEAL – application for leave to appeal. Held: Leave to appeal be granted in relation to grounds 1-5 inclusive of the draft notice of appeal. EVIDENCE – legal professional privilege – privilege claimed by appellants over documents seized by respondent pursuant to s 3E of Crimes Act 1914 (Cth) and ss 28 and 29 of Australian Crime Commission Act 2002 (Cth) – whether documents privileged – where respondent's statutory right to inspect qualified by common law privileges and immunities – whether reference to common law means common law of Australia – where appellants claimed status of certain disputed documents with respect to legal professional privilege governed by law of California – whether choice of law issue arises – relevant choice of law principles with respect to legal professional privilege. EVIDENCE – legal professional privilege – appeal from primary judge's rulings concerning privileged status of certain groups of disputed documents – application of Australian common law principles to disputed documents – whether inconsistent rulings. Held: The appeal must be dismissed.

Legislation: Crimes Act 1914 (Cth) s 3E Australian Crime Commission Act 2002 (Cth) s 28, s 29 Judiciary Act 1903 (Cth) s 39B Transport Accident Act 1986 (Vic) Motor Accidents Act 1988 (NSW) Federal Court of Australia Act 1976 (Cth) ss 21, 22, 23, 32