Huynh v Attorney General (NSW) [2021] NSWCA 297

Court of Appeal Supreme Court New South Wales Medium Neutral Citation: Huynh v Attorney General (NSW) [2021] NSWCA 297 Hearing dates: 19 August 2021 Date of orders: 8 December 2021 Decision date: 08 December 2021 Before: Bathurst CJ at [1]; Basten JA at [2]; Gleeson JA at [128]; Leeming JA at [129]; Payne JA at [251] Decision: (1) Declare that the power conferred by s 79 of the Crimes (Appeal and Review) Act 2001 (NSW): (a) is to be exercised by the Chief Justice or a judge of the Court authorised by the Chief Justice as a persona designata; (b) is not available with respect to a conviction or sentence for an offence against a law of the Commonwealth heard and determined in a New South Wales court. (2) Declare that the decision of Garling J purporting to determine an application lodged with the Supreme Court by Huy Huynh under s 78 of the Crimes (Appeal and Review) Act 2001 (NSW) with respect to his conviction for a contravention of the Criminal Code 1995 (Cth) is void and of no effect. (3) Otherwise dismiss the summons. Catchwords: COURTS AND JUDGES – supervisory jurisdiction – post-appeal application to Supreme Court for inquiry into conviction under Pt 7, Div 3 of the Crimes (Appeal and Review) Act 2001 (NSW) – power to consider application conferred on judge authorised by Chief Justice – power not conferred on Supreme Court – judge acting as persona designata COURTS AND JUDGES – supervisory jurisdiction – post-appeal application to Supreme Court for inquiry into conviction – conviction for breach of a law of the Commonwealth – whether State Act applies of its own force – whether State Act picked up and applied as Commonwealth law – operation of s 68 of Judiciary Act 1903 (Cth) where part only of State law ancillary to exercise of judicial power CRIME – federal offenders – offender convicted by State court for offence against federal law – applicability of State laws permitting post-appeal application to Supreme Court for inquiry into conviction JUDICIAL REVIEW – exercise of administrative power by Supreme Court judge – whether acting under a Commonwealth enactment – availability of judicial review – whether decision reviewable by Federal Court Legislation Cited: Administrative Decisions (Judicial Review) Act 1977 (Cth), s 9 Constitution, ss 51(xxxix), 51(xxiv), 61, 71, 73, 75, 76, 77, 79, 80; Ch III Crimes Act 1914 (Cth), ss 4AAA, 4AAB, 21D, 43; Pt 1B Criminal Code 1995 (Cth), ss 11.5, 307.11 Judiciary Act 1903 (Cth), ss 2, 39, 39B, 68, 72, 78, 78B, 79 Jurisdiction of Courts (Cross-Vesting) Act 1987 (Cth), ss 4, 6 Civil Procedure Act 2005 (NSW), s 183 Courts Legislation Further Amendment Act 1998 (NSW), Sch 10[12] Crimes (Appeal and Review) Act 2001 (NSW), ss 74, 75, 76, 77, 78, 79, 80, 81, 82, 84, 85, 86, 87, 114; Pt 7, Divs 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999 (NSW), s 102 Crimes Act 1900 (NSW), ss 474E, 474D, 474H, 475; Pt 13A, Div 4 Criminal Appeal Act 1912 (NSW), ss 5, 5C, 5D, 26, 27; Pts 3, 4 Criminal Law Amendment Act of 1883 (46 Vic 17), ss 383, 384 Interpretation Act 1987 (NSW), ss 12, 15 Supreme Court Act 1970 (NSW), ss 17, 69, 101 Criminal Code (Qld), ss 1, 672A Crimes Act 1958 (Vic), s 584 Sentencing Act 1995 (WA), s 140 s 73A of the Jury Act 1977 (NSW), Service and Execution of Process Act 1901 (Cth), s 19 Cases Cited: AB v Attorney General for New South Wales [2021] NSWSC 575 Aboud v R [2020] NSWSC 1648 Ammann v Wegener (1972) 129 CLR 415; [1972] HCA 58 Application by AZ for inquiry into conviction pursuant to s 78 of the Crimes (Appeal and Review) Act 2001 (NSW) [2020] NSWSC 1048 Application by Boris Reznitsky pursuant to Part 7 of the Crimes (Appeal and Review) Act 2001 (NSW) [2019] NSWSC 1600 Application by Brian Steer under Part 7 of the Crimes (Appeal and Review) Act 2001 [2020] NSWSC 623 Application by Brian Wayne Coles pursuant to s 78 of the Crimes (Appeal and Review) Act 2001 [2019] NSWSC 797 Application by Jack Chik Chen pursuant to Part 7 of the Crimes (Appeal and Review) Act 2001 (NSW) [2021] NSWSC 1024 Application by Kangmin Bae pursuant to Part 7 of the Crimes (Appeal and Review) Act 2001 (NSW) [2019] NSWSC 1413 Application by Lucy Patricia Klewer pursuant to s 78 of the Crimes (Appeal and Review) Act 2001 (NSW)1 [2021] NSWSC 1225 Application by Matias Eduardo Cicero Olivares pursuant to Part 7 of the Crimes (Appeal and Review) Act 2001 (NSW) [2021] NSWSC 96 Application by Pavel Svanda under Part 7, s 78 of the Crimes (Appeal and Review) Act 2001 (NSW) [2021] NSWSC 1061 Application by Peter Frederick Clark pursuant to s 78 of the Crimes (Appeal and Review) Act 2001 (NSW) [2021] NSWSC 1364 Application by Peter James Holland pursuant to s 78 Crimes (Appeal and Review) Act 2001 [2021] NSWSC 384 Application by Sef Gonzales pursuant to s 78 Crimes (Appeal and Review) Act 2001 (NSW); (No 3) [2021] NSWSC 263 Application by Sef Gonzales pursuant to s 78 Crimes (Appeal and Review) Act 2001 (NSW) (No 2) [2019] NSWSC 1412 Application by Yu Hai Li pursuant to s 78 of the Crimes (Appeal and Review) Act 2001 (NSW) [2021] NSWSC 544 Application of Doyle under s 78 of the Crimes (Appeal and Review) Act 2001 [2019] NSWSC 1029 Application of Huy Huynh under Part 7 of the Crimes (Appeal and Review) Act 2001 for an Inquiry [2020] NSWSC 1356 Application of James William Shepherd (13 September 1996) Application of Marcus Uusimaki pursuant to s 78 of the Crimes (Appeal and Review) Act 2001 [2020] NSWSC 1019 Application of Pearson (1999) 46 NSWLR 148; [1999] NSWSC 143 Aston v Irvine (1955) 92 CLR 353; [1955] HCA 53 Attorney-General (Cth) v Ogawa (2020) 281 FCR 1; [2020] FCAFC 180 Austral Pacific Group Ltd (in liq) v Airservices Australia (2000) 203 CLR 136; [2000] HCA 39 BMW Australia Ltd v Brewster; Westpac Banking Corporation v Lenthall [2019] HCA 45; 94 ALJR 51 Braysich v The Queen (2011) 243 CLR 434; [2011] HCA 14 Brown v The Queen (1986) 160 CLR 171; [1986] HCA 11 Burns v Corbett (2018) 265 CLR 304; [2018] HCA 15 Buttrose v Attorney General of New South Wales [2015] NSWCA 221; 324 ALR 562 Cheatle v The Queen (1993) 177 CLR 541; [1993] HCA 44 Chidiac, Neil – Application pursuant to s 78 Crimes (Appeal and Review) Act 2001 (NSW) [2015] NSWSC 157 Clark v Attorney General of New South Wales [2020] NSWCA 70 Commonwealth v Hospital Contribution Fund (1982) 159 CLR 49; [1982] HCA 13 Cranney v R; Huynh v R [2017] NSWCCA 234 Dacich v Director of Public Prosecutions [2020] NSWSC 1179 David Grant & Co Pty Ltd v Westpac Banking Corporation (1995) 184 CLR 265; [1995] HCA 43 Doyle's Farm Produce Pty Ltd v Murray Darling Basin Authority (No 2) [2021] NSWCA 246 DRJ v Commissioner of Victims Rights (No 2) (2020) 103 NSWLR 692; [2020] NSWCA 242 Eastman v DPP (ACT) (2003) 214 CLR 318; [2003] HCA 28 Eberstaller v Poulos (2014) 87 NSWLR 394; [2014] NSWCA 211 Federal Council of the British Medical Association in Australia v The Commonwealth (1949) 79 CLR 201; [1949] HCA 44 Folbigg v Attorney General of New South Wales [2021] NSWCA 44 GAR – Application for an inquiry into conviction pursuant to s 78 of the Crimes (Appeal and Review) Act 2001 [2019] NSWSC 982 GAR v Attorney General of New South Wales (No 2) [2017] NSWCA 314 Garth v The Queen [2017] NSWDC 469; 30 DCLR (NSW) 298 GILLIES, Max Perry – Application under Part 7 Crimes (Appeal and Review) Act 2001 [2021] NSWSC 1392 Grierson v The King (1938) 60 CLR 431; [1938] HCA 45 Grollo v Palmer (1995) 184 CLR 348; [1995] HCA 26 Henry White v The King (1906) 4 CLR 152; [1906] HCA 53 Hilton v Wells (1985) 157 CLR 57; [1985] HCA 16 Holmes v Angwin (1906) 4 CLR 297; [1906] HCA 64 Holzinger v Attorney-General (Qld) [2020] QCA 165; 385 ALR 158 Hopkins v Governor-General of Australia [2013] NSWCA 365; 303 ALR 157 Huddart, Parker & Co Pty Ltd v Moorehead (1909) 8 CLR 330; [1909] HCA 36 Huynh v The Queen [2019] HCASL 6 Jin Niu Investments Pty Ltd v Wang [2019] NSWSC 1697 Kentwell v The Queen (2014) 252 CLR 601; [2014] HCA 37 Kirk v Industrial Court of New South Wales (2010) 239 CLR 531; [2010] HCA 1 Lambert v Weichelt (1954) 28 ALJ 282 Lavender v Department of Industry (NSW) [2017] NSWDC 236; 25 DCLR (NSW) 389 Lavender v Director of Fisheries Compliance, Department of Industry Skills and Regional Development [2018] NSWCA 174; 359 ALR 96 Lazarus v Independent Commission Against Corruption (2017) 94 NSWLR 36; [2017] NSWCA 37 LNC Industries Ltd v BMW (Australia) Ltd (1983) 151 CLR 575; [1983] HCA 31 Lodhi v Attorney General of New South Wales [2013] NSWCA 433; 241 A Crim R 477 Macteldir Pty Ltd v Dimovski [2005] FCA 1528; 226 ALR 773 Maguire v Simpson (1977) 139 CLR 362; [1977] HCA 63 Mallard v The Queen (2005) 224 CLR 125; [2005] HCA 68 Martens v Commonwealth (2009) 174 FCR 114; [2009] FCA 207 Masson v Parsons (2019) 266 CLR 554; [2019] HCA 21 Medical Board of Victoria v Meyer (1937) 58 CLR 62; [1937] HCA 47 Miller & Associates Insurance Broking Pty Ltd v BMW Australia Finance Ltd (2010) 241 CLR 357; [2010] HCA 31 Momcilovic v The Queen (2011) 245 CLR 1; [2011] HCA 34 MZAPC v Minister for Immigration and Border Protection [2021] HCA 17; 95 ALJR 441 North Australian Aboriginal Justice Agency Limited v Northern Territory (2015) 256 CLR 569; [2015] HCA 41 Northern Territory of Australia v GPAO (1999) 196 CLR 553; [1999] HCA 8 NT Power Generation Pty Ltd v Power and Water Authority (2004) 219 CLR 90; [2004] HCA 48 Nudd v Minister for Home Affairs [2011] FCAFC 105; (2011) 122 ALD 529 O'Donoghue v Ireland (2008) 234 CLR 599; [2008] HCA 14 Ozgen v R [2021] NSWCCA 252 Patsalis v Attorney-General for New South Wales (2013) 85 NSWLR 463; [2013] NSWCA 343 Pearce v Cocchiaro (1977) 137 CLR 600; [1977] HCA 31 Peel v The Queen (1971) 125 CLR 447; [1971] HCA 59 Perrier v Kerr (unrep, Ryan J, FCA, 19 August 1997) Queen Victoria Memorial Hospital v Thornton (1953) 87 CLR 144; [1953] HCA 11. R v Gunn (No 1) (1942) 43 SR (NSW) 23 R v Gunn (No 2) (1942) 43 SR (NSW) 27 R v Li [2020] NSWSC 59 R v Martens (No 1) [2010] 1 Qd R 564; [2009] QCA 139 R v Martens (No 2) [2011] 1 Qd R 575; [2009] QCA 351 Ratten v The Queen (1974) 131 CLR 510; [1974] HCA 35 Rizeq v Western Australia (2017) 262 CLR 1; [2017] HCA 23 Rohde v Director of Public Prosecutions (1986) 161 CLR 119; [1986] HCA 50 Seaegg v The King (1932) 48 CLR 251 at 257; [1932] HCA 47 Shi v Attorney-General for New South Wales [2019] NSWSC 1686 Shi v R [2020] NSWCCA 42 Sinkovich v Attorney General of New South Wales (2013) 85 NSWLR 783; [2013] NSWCA 383 Solomons v District Court of New South Wales (2002) 211 CLR 119; [2002] HCA 47 State of New South Wales v Kable (2013) 252 CLR 118; [2013] HCA 26 The Lord Mayor, Councillors and Citizens of the City of Melbourne v The Commonwealth (1947) 74 CLR 31; [1947] HCA 26 The Queen v Loewenthal; Ex parte Blacklock (1974) 131 CLR 338; [1974] HCA 36 The Queen v Murphy (1985) 158 CLR 596; [1985] HCA 50 Varley v Attorney-General (NSW) (1987) 8 NSWLR 30 Wainohu v State of New South Wales (2011) 243 CLR 181; [2011] HCA 24 Williams v The King [No 1] (1933) 50 CLR 536; [1933] HCA 54 Williams v The King [No 2] (1934) 50 CLR 551; [1934] HCA 19 Wollongong City Council v Papadopoulos [2019] NSWCA 178 Xiao v R (2018) 96 NSWLR 1; [2018] NSWCCA 4 Yasmin v Attorney-General (Cth) (2015) 236 FCR 169; [2015] FCFCA 145 Texts Cited: M Aronson et al, Judicial Review of Administrative Action and Government Liability (6th ed, Lawbook Co, 2017) M Leeming, Authority to Decide: The Law of Jurisdiction in Australia (2nd ed Federation Press, 2020) Geoffrey Lindell, Cowen and Zines's Federal Jurisdiction in Australia (4th ed, The Federation Press, 2016) A Sapienza, The Non-statutory Executive Power of the Commonwealth (2020, The Federation Press) J Stellios, The Federal Judicature: Chapter III of the Constitution (2nd ed 2020, LexisNexis), Ch 10 Category: Principal judgment Parties: Huy Huynh (Appellant) Attorney General of New South Wales (First Respondent) Attorney-General (Cth) (Second Respondent) Supreme Court of New South Wales (Third Respondent) Representation: Counsel: