Regina v B D [2001] NSWCCA 184

Reported Decision : 122 A Crim R 28

New South Wales Court of Criminal Appeal

CITATION : Regina v B D [2001] NSWCCA 184 FILE NUMBER(S) : CCA 60073/01 HEARING DATE(S) : 30/04/01 JUDGMENT DATE : 15 May 2001

PARTIES : Regina B D - Respondent JUDGMENT OF : Stein JA at 1; Greg James J at 2; Bell J at 3

LOWER COURT JURISDICTION : District Court LOWER COURT FILE NUMBER(S) : 99/41/0175 LOWER COURT JUDICIAL Graham DCJ OFFICER :

COUNSEL : M C Marien - Appellant J P Punch - Respondent SOLICITORS : S E O'Connor - Appellant Galloways - Respondent CATCHWORDS : Question submitted by Director of Public Prosecutions pursuant to s5A(2) Criminal Appeal Act 1912 - does obtaining and transporting ingredients and implements constitute taking a step in the process of manufacture of prohibited drugs Criminal Appeal Act 1912 LEGISLATION CITED : Crimes Legislation Further Amendment Act 2000 Drug Misuse and Trafficking Act 1985 Director of Public Prosecutions Reference No 2 of 1995 (1995) 65 SASR 508 Federal Commissioner of Taxation v Jack Zinader Pty Ltd (1949) 78 CLR 336 CASES CITED: McNicol v Pinch (1906) 2 KB 352 R v Kouroumalos [2000] NSWCCA 453 R v Thomas (1993) 67 A Crim R 308 DECISION : Question answered in the negative

IN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEAL

60073/01

STEIN JA GREG JAMES J BELL J TUESDAY 15 MAY 2001 REGINA v B D JUDGMENT 1 STEIN JA: I agree with Bell J. 2 GREG JAMES J: I agree with Bell J. 3 BELL J: Pursuant to s 5A(2) of the Criminal Appeal Act 1912 ("the CAA") the Director of Public Prosecutions submitted the following question for determination by this Court: "Did his Honour Judge Graham err in law in concluding that the obtaining and transporting of ingredients (namely, Sudafed, phosphorous powder and orthophosphoric acid) and implements to be used in the manufacture of methylamphetamine could not constitute taking a step in the process of manufacture within the meaning of s6 of the Drug Misuse and Trafficking Act 1985 ("the Act")?"