CATCHWORDS Administrative Law - Administrative Decisions (Judicial) Review) Act, 1977, s.13 - request for supply of reasons - seizure by Customs officers under s.203 Customs Act, 1901 of goods believed to be forfeited - whether decision in connection with the investigation or prosecution of persons for any offences against a law of the Commonwealth within Sch.2(e@)(1) of Administrative Decisions (Judicial Review) Act or whether a decision that may result in the bringing ofproceedings for recovery of penalties within Sch.2(f). Customs - Customs Act, 1901, s.234(1) - Customs prosecution - whether criminal or civil proceeding PAUL A. MURPHY & ORS. Vv. K.R.M. HOLDINGS PTY. LIMITED No. G309 of 1985 Fox, Beaumont and Pincus JJ. 23 December 1985 Sydney IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA ) ) NEW SOUTH WALES DISTRICT REGISTRY ) No. G309 of 1985 ) GENERAL DIVISION ) ON APPEAL FROM A SINGLE JUDGE OF THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA BETWEEN: PAUL A. MURPHY Pirst Appellant R.J. POWER Second Appellant GAVIN McDONALD Third Appellant AND: K.R.M. HOLDINGS PTY. LIMITED Respondent ORDER JUDGES MAKING ORDER: Fox, Beaumont and Pincus, JJ. DATE OF ORDER: 23 December 1985 WHERE MADE: Sydney THE COURT ORDERS THAT: 1. Appeal be dismissed. 2. The appellants pay the respondent's costs of the appeal. Note: Settlement and entry of orders is dealt with aun Order 36 of the Federal Court Rules. Tl THE FEDGR2L COUFT OF AMETRALT~ | NEM FOUTH WALES DISTRICT REGISTRY 3 Wo, GING ag 1998 GENEFAL DIVESTOM ' RETUEEIT: FAML 3. ITTF Fjevk Arpellanr fecond Appellanc SAVT McDoiueALo Thirst Appellanr BLR.M. HeLtTNGs FIY.LIMITED Fespondert CORAM: FOZ, BEAUMONT & PINCUS ed an u Q DATE: 22 DECEMBEF 17°35 "4 -? FELSONS FOF JUNGHENT The amlestien which arises on this apoeeal is wherhec th hb appelian t cusroms officers. oe anv of them. are oblizen Fo eeovide a statemert sinder =.1? of tne Administrative Pecistisns (Tudteral Bevciew: Jen La77 ("the Arc") in ,elaPicn ta a seitire , n nh ~ a1 my ty of imported qonds authorised By chi second appellant. The waa effected in reliance on ¢.70715) of the Quatoms Sct 21 on the arcing that the omods were hekiecved on reasanable trcurds ts he fortereed, of S81TuUre 6* Given: nas, "ite, ubeack to this serctisn, where recvion 293, the resnonsible persan peacticable, serve an rhe owner of the ano thet possession. custedy or contra immetiareivy before they were seiged. =1th epost, a2 notice i weitind - var audentifvinae Fhe ponds; tdi) Specifvine, a AO PE OPELATE percsan sub-ceecotin (461 A netice of claim underc §9205(As must be given within 74 days, at vvek cf extra-audicial condemnation, Feerertire orauiss omder $.229 nF bbe Ack oon rhe H DB + rary if ua a Te ft th a + t a St m pityal me} a slication wae made imder 3.17, but was refused, In eorresocandence ict wae claimed on fehalf of rhe Tustoms authorities Fhat Phe Aecisian fo seize was one ro which para. lifilotc) of the Act referred as it was iunciuced in 1A decisions relarinag to the admunzityaricn of reipinal wasfice, ani in eacrienlas 'id Getie1lins in wonnecticn wrea fhe invyestrixatian me ia flen sF werecns for any affencss law oof Fhe Commonwealth oor at ri 'Lis decisions in ft the appoinrment vf ainvesridators ors for rhe purposes of such 'iri dec1siens ain connectisn wr ss search warcants under a Law of rhe Commonwealth or of a Territerv: the C a _ a! 5 7 decisirons und of a Térrite Anocumencs, sumnmening of i) Det os SLT LAvTt esonF As fs dectrsicns an cennecr monduet of praceadins ders PECLINLA enacfm ra ti) decisions an connection with the wnvertraaticn of persons for auch cantraven aa Pr m a] ul . Plronse i deci1st9ons in connecricn 1 arch twarcants. Writs of Customs Warrants under enactm eat Teo Ls under anacrmenre preduckiron er documents. tnfcpmariogad ob the summoning -£ The statutory scheme plainly enough -=nvisadges the commencement of civil proceedings, fallewind upon 4A setters. keespass, ar proceedings by the Collectar for condemnation. An 234) invoiving pavment of a penalfy (see also 3,745), There T ages with fhe Learned owides that pari.) cf tre Becond Schedule ka the Act, which relates ro "daeisiens relacing to the administration of criminal wistice" has no apelicaricn. r relate "to the administration of criminal wstice est this conclusion on che basis that the decision did noc on. The general tder hehind pari. (ff) seems bo be thar cacad procedure will wtself take care of what 5.12 seeks oro achieve when wf requires reasons to be aiyen, Conversely, civil precedure is not to be complicated hy fhe 3.13 procedure. The paragrapn has two parts: a) where the decisitcn 1s tn connection with the unsritunisn ar conduct aif ceoceedinas in a w rt 'Th fL +a iw{in tn haw oT eivil cere and (bh) where the decision rel in the bringing af proceedings ain vi erv7il conet fae the recwcers a of penalties. One or both of these pacts 1s chen pacticularwzet. T Enes= parts, Nor, aS Lt seems bs me, foes Le enm= wich the second. A seizure has ats own consequences, Put these are oT Ay Lay) ry uw) q vA nHBa) cay BP n i) a a 5) ryrs tall BH] re rT overlap with the customs ay no assistance t2 construction can therefore be cbtairned fecn sub-para.+i1i) nf para.(fti. Faragrapn ¢iv: may te af soma Sianibicance, because s.214 deals, unter alta. with a cequest for rhe production of locuments after candids have been feiss. Feeminglys, because of siub-para.tiv' no reasons paad he titan nade rc 3,17 in e"cnneckhion "ILE + derpatan be mas ai + regnieement, An oanteretbinae marter for prezenr gugpas=co 1a Phar B <j wt ' hr at Ey oy e oa) pass Pa) Ma o a a mn a a ba] % B + a a Re "rr "Ap > a) " cel. . te : ~ we 7 ~ > rr a a ae m. Done. 2 Fer mM IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA ) ) NEW SOUTH WALES DISTRICT REGISTRY ) No. G309 of 1985 ) GENERAL DIVISION ) ON APPEAL FROM A SINGLE JUDGE OF THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA BETWEEN: PAUL A. MURPHY First Appellant R.J. POWER Second Appellant GAVIN McDONALD Third Appellant AND: K.R.M. HOLDINGS PTY. LIMITED Respondent Coram: Fox, Beaumont and Pincus JJ. Date : 23 December 1985 REASONS FOR JUDGMENT Beaumont, J. I have had the advantage of reading the Reasons of Fox, J. and of Pincus, J. and I agree with those Reasons and with the orders proposed. TU THe FROER SL CouRT OF A WE OTH WALES STFS DISDFICT FEGI™ GEUEFAL PITTS TON a: D a a a4 Fox, BEAUMONT I= mM 23 DECEMBER 1985 FEASON AND FING We TJ. er OM ZEERSL feoom of che Fetleral alusrralia S1imrlé cot a wuTss Cte GETWEETI - EAT ~ rue S20 TT Mebane to ANT: KEM. HOLOTTICS ec Feeperoatnar TROCHENT FINCWS T.: Sdminrsreaciys Ter Ts The respondent owns certain Mercedes-Benz motor vehicles which were wmported inte rhis country and later seised by. or an hehalf of, one of the appellants, «ho ace Customs officials. There was evidence thar the basis of selzure was rhat fhe act 1901) because they fell within one of more of Fhe paragcaphs at sib-s,729%1). In substance the allevarisan acrears to be that the vehicles were purchased in England, whence the eame, For greater sums than ciscioesed cto the Customs, The respondent soaucht., pursuank fo s.1l7 of the Tutieral Review act, statements in writing in respect of Phe dectesione on B2Lre setting ot the matters referred Fo in aib-.17il:, The T BP ta +a4 a =, u effect of the wudement under avpeal, 1f carrec Jb ]ty ct uy aD o ue c up iD appeliants are opliged oto provide the srarements The appellants relied firstiv ipon sub-para.(e fit: 62) decisei , th ne relating eo Eh administraris oO Crimlnai awistice, and, in particulac - (io decrsions in Tonnec"ion with mTna 1a) investigation or pras For anv otfences aaa1 Commonwealth ar of a Te a5 = Ther? was avidence thak the Department believed that, tn respert ot Fhe seizures in question. "there was a atrona potenria beinagint a prosecution peoceeding" and if was sworn Phat in determining wherher or net to se1ze. the practice 15 Followed af seisure". On tne face of it, then, there 19 something te ce said for the vrew that tne se1suces in question Fad a connecticn with the onvestigqation «at persons for an offence aqvainst the Law of the Commonwealth. namelv sub-s,234(1) mf the Customs Art which, among <ather things, prohibits eavasion of "payment of anv duty which we payable' and prohibins the makina of false eantrie:., Th was argued, however, befere us, that prswceedindvs fob beeaches of 2, 224/1:' are nor criminal in nature. The aurhoritr1ss whieftivy relevant to ctnar submisticn, <9 far as Anstralla 12 xi nm1D = 'D ns ite] a D> my In 'rl a re) Lid Blyfon iy ie ist= t vy= o ry im) ma t a1) ~ Ss rt ra) n wa Foe The cécavecy oat penalties other than a vsecuniary psanalir eeferread Tc in s,243R under rhis Act..." are ¢ An Ferred f9 as th kes peoaviston tor the ecurrs m re) Pay r oO i] ko fe st f=] fu Customs proasecuftians. in which such proceedings are toa be inetituted, ana the like. and $.c4+7 15s as follows: "Every Customs prosecution in & court referred re in sub-section 245/1) may be commenced prosecuted and proceeded with in accordance with anv rules of gn practic (if any) established by the Court for Ceown suits in revenue matters or in accordance with the usual practice and procedure of che Court in evil cases oar in accordance with tne Airectione of the Court or a Judas," PP) In Mallan » Lee (above), there was a prosecution tinder income trax Leqislatien and a question arose as to the nature . praceeding, in view at rhe presence in the lLeaislaticn «tf a provision indistinguisnabls in atfect from 5,247 af che Tueteom= aor cefecr the celevant provision being ¢,777 af che Toiome TA Ack LaAlI6-L344 Or the theese ~udeges, onl- McTrercnan J. feund it mnecassacy fo reack 2 final view on this point. Refecering to the arqiment than the Acro in -mestion ices net amount to the commission of A crime. Kis Honour remarxea, at ep. 217,018: "The argument is basec upon other sections at the s Act providing proce Fa civil than i erosecucton af 'affenc against the autherities whicon have been cited in with Enis argument ac nor enable a veanelusison to be reached that such scoceaur peovisions alter the character which the wocd 'auilts of ano E s = duce which 18 more appropriate o criminal matters, far rhea es The a f a on set 5- wD Fy A r offence,' nativally ascribe to conduct af iundarstaring income in beeach of 3,230, T chank that the better crest ows ra accepr thea leaitslanivs definition of Fhe ronduct;: r sheild hetd accordinal? bnar o.t 1s an arttence and = mriminal." That hire Rong waa ta sav ois perrinenr hare becaqutes sub-s.,27400), whirh sas ansecrsq Pro Aceh Mo, FL we 1222, mn preecerbes Fhe penalties for contravention of sub-s.234(1) in lanquagve commencing as follows: " cl) ve anil) rson who contravenes Ap = n offenee punishable upon conyicfion... af WroTh ort The question arcse again in Uartsmith - MeGeveen «Loe Fs 30 CLF. 338, the seconn case ceferred to above, we which the Hish Comet had fo cansider fhe natucs= of an action commenced in that Court by the Commistioner of Taxation for declarations (har Pe] 5! hil itt "We ace here primarily in Ft. "Vit. relating for che yvecovery a 3 and nar "sith ves and nothing ee Eheows any 4 3 oF . and Pulladas 7, 17 the case Dr Teo Wo ew rots Bb mors Oh op 'Tl 3a)y5 wh cary fet mop ct Tugse remarks vere fo the effect that the proceedinvs were nor The distinction is drawn un rhe passage fust quoted betweer rhe mature of the srocedure and fhe nature 3 rhe ty L met the Juodaeial Fewrew Act. iar asa Ehe Jatter consgidecarion which 1a material. Contraventions of siub-5. 73401) mav lead te a pearson's heing held auilty of an offence oinishahbla pon canwietion - sub-s. lature could have selecred more plainly 74 th lanquade the leqi unfrinced indicate Fhe antention that tnose wha the criminal law rather than teinad gu rm ran rr tet bi]thm aa] ™ m1 mM s D ty n r a my the t1ivil law, Tr follews that decisions taken in rennectiaon with the particular facts of this case. kha fub-paragrapr eheitd Fe heli inapplicable. as 1t waa Bey the leacned primary trudge. That 12 i5 because che most thar was proved was that chere wonld have heen NG Selzuce had the department nor heen satisiied that there was evidence of commission of an offence inder s.034:1). No doubt a peasecutian may fallew on from the seisure. TE was nar said, however, ror 15 it necessarily the case, that the sevcures had te mao with the process of iunvestiwatien;: "ney may equally well have he sub-para.:eee1) af senedule ft, Toa dispose of vhe peesanc foe rile evidence r iD a) t+ hnere was no su ob cr rT ib Ns fo a p- wo vOo c a r st a) dt au bla pa) cr tao establish the reaursite cannection. In other factual e_1tuations, seizures of aoods unlawfully imported may well be soa comnected with uwnvesridgation of offences as to fall within the relevant sub-raraqraph, The second question in the care 15 whether the decizions Fall within sub-para.i(fs andoin particular within the -sening SEPRSsILONS: "Deerszons in connection with the iunstrrurtian or conduct of proceedings in 4 civil caurc. includina decisions that relate to, of may result oun, re beinging of such proceedinys for fhe recovery cf pecuniary penalties arising from contraventicns cf enactments..." The decisions fe seize do not fair che general 'descriprion cf being "in connection with" the insriturion cr cranduct of anv peocesdinas: the vceal arqument was that they are caucdht br rhe mare pacticulas description afber rhe word "including", Goaunsel For tne acopellants submitted in" the beingding of proceedings foc recovery af the penalfies set aub im eub-s,204(2), The words "vesute in" cannote causaticn, decisions to seize mav cause the bringing of che proceeainze Ferre may form fact of aA causal chain which leads an tn the dnstieucion of proceedings for penalties, one would not spear ci The decrisicns fo se1ze as in themselves brinving abour that Is faa eh ce) o rc fat ba itya Byfa > Ty ian it B) Be mt # Pal) a Jt [se nmoqaestion da omar Fa within <«ither peoavision relied on and the appea Mmysr out . . - 1 TeTy TL ' cht ee Coe -- . . ' we 7 > oo i ' . ao ' 4 . of Joa t ' was ' ' ; i . 2 t 3 packs : A fou ' . int Pa art . . ' : ' fy fue can ' van ' } , Saab a, . ' ' rae ae 8 toot ' , Pans fs fo ay, : 7 ; , a '