High Court of Australia
HIGH COURT OF AUSTRALIA
KIEFEL CJ,
GAGELER, GORDON, EDELMAN, STEWARD, GLEESON AND JAGOT JJ
THE KING APPELLANT
AND
JACOBS GROUP (AUSTRALIA) PTY LTD
FORMERLY KNOWN AS SINCLAIR KNIGHT MERZ RESPONDENT
The King v Jacobs Group (Australia) Pty Ltd
[2023] HCA 23
Date of Hearing: 12 April 2023
Date of Judgment: 2 August 2023
S148/2022
ORDER
1. Appeal allowed.
2. Set aside the order of the Court of Criminal Appeal of New South Wales made on 11 July 2022, in so far as it dismissed the appeal against sentence for sequence three, and remit the matter to that Court for redetermination of that part of the appellant's appeal under s 5D of the Criminal Appeal Act 1912 (NSW).
On appeal from the Supreme Court of New South Wales
Representation
J T Gleeson SC with C J Tran for the appellant (instructed by Commonwealth Director of Public Prosecutions)
B W Walker SC with N M Kirby for the respondent (instructed by Jones Day)
Notice: This copy of the Court's Reasons for Judgment is subject to formal revision prior to publication in the Commonwealth Law Reports.
CATCHWORDS
The King v Jacobs Group (Australia) Pty Ltd
Statutes – Construction – Where respondent pleaded guilty to offences of conspiracy to cause offer of provision of bribe to foreign public official contrary to ss 11.5 and 70.2(1) of Criminal Code (Cth) – Where s 70.2(5) of Criminal Code (Cth) relevantly prescribed maximum monetary penalty for offence as not more than greatest of: (a) 100,000 penalty units; or (b) if court can determine value of benefit that body corporate obtained that is reasonably attributable to conduct constituting offence, three times value of that benefit – Where parties agreed "benefit" obtained was securing contracts for carrying out construction projects – Where parties also agreed "benefit" obtained was money received for performing contracts – Whether s 70.2(5)(b) required value of benefit obtained by respondent to be determined as sum of amounts respondent in fact received under contracts secured by bribery – Whether deduction could properly be made for any costs incurred in performing contracts.
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