Curran, Clifford George Fraser v Commissioner of the Australian Federal Police [1984] FCA 302

3h men SOL ° CATCHWORDS Narcotics - Conspiracy to import drugs - Action for pecuniary penalty - Assessment of value of benefit derived froma particular narcotics dealing - Distinction between apportionment of aross proceeds and deduction of expenses and outgoings - Whether the Court has any discretion as to the making of an order

for penalty - Reference to Parliamentary debate.

Customs Act 1901 ss. 243A. 243B. 243C

THE COMMISSIONER OF THE AUSTRALIAN FEDERAL POLICE V CLIFFORD GEORGE FRASER CURRAN G.85 of 1984

CORAM: WILCOX J DATE: 27 September 1984 PLACE: SYDNEY

~~

No. G.85 of 1984 —~

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

NEW SOUTH WALES DISTRICT REGISTRY GENERAL DIVISION

wee ren

BETWEEN : THE COMMISSIONER OF THE AUSTRALIAN FEDERAL POLICE

Applicant

AND: CLIFFORD GEORGE FRASER CURRAN

Respondent

QRDERS CORAM: WILCOX J DATE: 27 SEPTEMBER 1984 PLACE SYDNEY 1. Order that the respondent pay to the Commonwealth a

pecuniary penalty pursuant to 3.243B of the Customs Act 1901 in the sum of Five thousand four hundred and forty eight dollars ($5,448.00).

2. Order that the respondent pay to the applicant his costs of the application.

3. Direct the Registrar of the Court to forward to the Law Society of New South Wales a copv of the Reasons for Judqement in the matter and to make available to the Society, as required, copies of all affidavits and exhibits and the transcript of the

proceedinas.

- IN_THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

NEW SOUTH WALES DISTRICT REGISTRY No. G.85 of 1984

GENERAL DIVISION BETWEEN: THE COMMISSIONER OF THE AUSTRALIAN FEDERAL POLICE Applicant AND: CLIFFORD GEORGE FRASER CURRAN Respondent REASONS FOR JUDGMENT CORAM: WILCOX J DATE: 27 SEPTEMBER 1984 PLACE: SYDNEY

By Act Number 92, 1979, Parliament inserted into the Customs Act. 1901, a new Division (Division 3, Part XIII) providing for the recovery by the Commonwealth of Australia of pecuniary penalties from persons proved to have dealt in narcotic aoods in contravention of that Act. The operation of the Division does not depend upon the prior conviction, or even prosecution. of the defendant for a narcotics offence. It is sufficient that, in proceedings in this Court, the defendant be shown to have been involved either in a single "prescribed