Federal Court of Australia
JUDGMENT No. 222.7
CATCHWORDS
ADMINISTRATIVE LAW - judicial review - Administrative Decisions (Judicial Review) Act 1977 - review of decision to institute proceedings under Crimes (Taxation Offences) Act 1980 - whether oppressive, abusive of process or improper exercise of power to prosecute - alleged failure to take into account relevant considerations ~ delay in bringing application - whether reasonable - whether decision of Director of Public Prosecutions reviewable - discretion - application dismissed
Administrative Decisions (Judicial Review) Act 1977, s.5
DENNIS JAMES NEWBY - Appellant ROBERT GEORGE MOODIE - Farst Respondent
DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC PROSECUTIONS - Second Respondent
No. G 134 of 1988
CORAM: SHEPPARD, MORLING and PINCUS JJ. 3 June 1988
Sydney
\ ben
IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
) ) NEW SOUTH WALES DISTRICT REGISTRY ) No. G 134 of 1988 ) )
GENERAL DIVISION
On appeal froma single Judge of the Federal Court of Australia
BETWEEN: DENNIS JAMES NEWBY Appellant AND: ROBERT GEORGE MOODIE
First Respondent
AND: DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC PROSECUTIONS
Second Respondent
MINUTE OF ORDER
JUDGES MAKING ORDER Sheppard, Morling and Pincus JJ.
DATE OF ORDER 2 3 June 1988 WHERE MADE H Sydney
THE COURT ORDERS AS FOLLOWS: 1. Appeal dismissed.
2. Applellant to pay respondents' costs.
NOTE: Settlement and entry of orders is dealt with in
Order 36 of the Federal Court Rules.
IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
) ) NEW SOUTH WALES DISTRICT REGISTRY ) No. G 134 of 1988 ) )
GENERAL DIVISION
On appeal from a single Judge of the Federal Court of Australia
BETWEEN: DENNIS JAMES NEWBY Appellant AND: ROBERT GEORGE MOODIE
First Respondent
AND: DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC PROSECUTIONS
Second Respondent
CORAM: SHEPPARD, MORLING and PINCUS JJ. DATE: 3 June 1988
REASONS FOR JUDGMENT
THE COURT:
This is an appeal from a decision of a judge of the Court dismissing an application for relief under the Administrative Decisions (Judicial Review) Act 1977 ("the Judicial Review Act"). The appellant is a solicitor who formerly acted for clients who were engaged in what were known as Slutzkin assets stripping tax minimization schemes and prepared legal documentation necessary to give effect to
We try to embed the page this law was scraped from. If the site blocks framing, you still get the link and a local excerpt.
Last checked with source on —
Checking whether the official page can be embedded…
Plain-English simplify of this law: a short summary, key points, and both sides of the argument. Generated on first view via Replicate, then cached. Vote on what helps your study.
No study brief is cached for this law yet. Sign up to generate a plain-English brief.
Sign up to generate