Crime and Corruption Commission v Carne [2023] HCA 28

HIGH COURT OF AUSTRALIA

KIEFEL CJ,

GAGELER, GORDON, EDELMAN AND JAGOT JJ

CRIME AND CORRUPTION COMMISSION APPELLANT

AND

PETER DAMIEN CARNE RESPONDENT

Crime and Corruption Commission v Carne

[2023] HCA 28

Date of Hearing: 6 & 7 June 2023

Date of Judgment: 13 September 2023

B66/2022

ORDER

Appeal dismissed with costs.

On appeal from the Supreme Court of Queensland

Representation

P J Dunning KC with M R Wilkinson and S E D Spottiswood for the appellant (instructed by Crime and Corruption Commission)

J M Horton KC with J P Pemberton for the respondent (instructed by Gilshenan & Luton Legal Practice)

T M Begbie KC with P J Melican and E H I Smith for the Attorney-General of the Commonwealth, intervening (instructed by Australian Government Solicitor)

B W Walker SC with R M O'Gorman KC and C J Tessmann for the Speaker of the Legislative Assembly of Queensland, intervening (instructed by Clerk of the Queensland Parliament)

Notice: This copy of the Court's Reasons for Judgment is subject to formal revision prior to publication in the Commonwealth Law Reports.

CATCHWORDS

Crime and Corruption Commission v Carne

State Parliament – Parliamentary privilege – Where Crime and Corruption Commission ("Commission") conducted investigation in response to complaint alleging corrupt conduct and maladministration by Public Trustee of Queensland – Where Commission then composed Report on allegations and investigation – Where Commission sought to use Parliamentary Crime and Corruption Committee ("Committee") to make Report public – Where Commission requested Committee direct under s 69(1)(b) of Crime and Corruption Act 2001 (Qld) ("CC Act") that Report be given to Speaker of Legislative Assembly to be tabled in Legislative Assembly – Where s 69(1)(b) direction not given prior to or during court proceedings – Where Committee issued certificate under s 55 of Parliament of Queensland Act 2001 (Qld) ("POQ Act") certifying Report was a document prepared for the purposes of, or incidental to, transacting business of the Committee under s 9(2)(c) of POQ Act – Where s 9 of POQ Act defined "proceedings in the Assembly" to include "all words spoken and acts done in the course of, or for the purposes of or incidental to, transacting business of the Assembly or a committee" – Where "proceedings in the Assembly" could not be impeached or questioned in any court under s 8 of POQ Act – Whether court precluded by s 8(1) of POQ Act from making declaration concerning Report because preparation and presentation of Report were "proceedings" in Legislative Assembly.