Obeid v R [2017] NSWCCA 221

Court of Criminal Appeal Supreme Court New South Wales Medium Neutral Citation: Obeid v R [2017] NSWCCA 221 Hearing dates: 5-7 June 2017 Date of orders: 13 September 2017 Decision date: 13 September 2017 Before: Bathurst CJ at [1]; Leeming JA at [291]; R A Hulme J at [336]; Hamill J at [470]; N Adams J at [474] Decision: 1. Grant the applicant leave to appeal on Grounds 5 and 7 of the amended grounds of appeal filed on 8 March 2017.

2. Pursuant to r 4 of the Criminal Appeal Rules, grant the applicant leave to raise Grounds 1, 2, 3, 4 and 6 of the amended grounds of appeal filed on 8 March 2017.

3. Appeal against conviction dismissed.

4. Grant leave to appeal against sentence.

5. Appeal against sentence dismissed. Catchwords: CRIMINAL LAW – appeal – conviction – whether the duty breached by the applicant was bad in law – whether the issues at trial were within the exclusive cognisance of the NSW Parliament and should not have been determined in the Supreme Court – whether the offence of official misconduct does not cover members of Parliament acting in their capacity as such – whether trial judge misdirected the jury on the element of "seriousness" – whether the verdict in relation to the "wilfulness" element is unreasonable or cannot be supported having regard to the evidence – whether trial judge misdirected the jury on the element of "wilfulness" – whether miscarriage of justice by reason that applicant's lawyers failed to adduce evidence on various matters

CRIMINAL LAW – appeal – sentencing – common law offence – whether trial judge erred in concluding that offences found in Part 4A of the Crimes Act were the relevant analogue – whether trial judge erred in finding that the applicant had been solely motivated to benefit himself or his family – whether trial judge erred in taking into account that the jury had been satisfied the conduct merited criminal punishment – whether trial judge denied the applicant procedural fairness in holding that the mitigating factor under s 21A(3)(a) of the Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999 had not been made out – whether trial judge erred in finding that damage caused to the institutions of government constituted loss or damage for the purposes of s 21A – whether the sentence imposed was manifestly excessive Legislation Cited: Australia Act 1986 (Cth), ss 1, 3 Australia Act 1986 (UK), ss 1, 3 Bill of Rights 1689 (1 Will & Mar sess 2 c 2), art 9 Canadian Human Rights Act, RSC 1985, c H-6 Constitution (Disclosures by Members) Regulation 1983 (NSW) Constitution Act 1902 (NSW), s 14A Constitution Act 1934 (SA), s 38 Constitution Act 1975 (Vic), s 19 Constitution of Queensland 2001 (Qld), s 9 Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999 (NSW), ss 3A, 21A(1), 24C, 44(2) Crimes Act 1900 (NSW), Part 4A, ss 249B, 307B Crimes Act 1958 (Vic), s 318 Crimes and Other Acts (Amendment) Act 1974 (NSW), s 344A Criminal Appeal Act 1912 (NSW), ss 5(1)(c), s 5F Criminal Code (Cth), s 142.2 Criminal Damage Act 1971 (UK), s 1 Evidence Act 1995 (NSW), s 48 Independent Commission Again Corruption Act 1988 (NSW), s 9 Parliamentary Contributory Superannuation Amendment (Criminal Charges and Convictions) Act 2017 (NSW) Parliamentary Employment and Staff Relations Act, RSC 1985, c 33 (2nd Supp) Parliamentary Privilege Act 1858 (Tas), s 3 Parliamentary Privileges Act 1891 (WA), s 1 Parliamentary Privileges Act 1987 (Cth), ss 5, 7, 16 Cases Cited: Alford v Magee (1952) 85 CLR 437; [1952] HCA 3 Arena v Nader [1997] HCATrans 321; (1997) 71 ALJR 1604 Armstrong v Budd (1969) 71 SR (NSW) 386 ARS v R (No 2) [2011] NSWCCA 266 Attorney General's Reference (No 3 of 2003) [2005] QB 73 Aubrey v The Queen [2017] HCA 18; (2017) 91 ALJR 601 Barker v The Queen (1983) 153 CLR 338; [1983] HCA 18 Barton v Taylor (1886) 11 App Cas 197 Blackstock v R [2013] NSWCCA 172 Blackwell v The Queen (2011) 81 NSWLR 119; [2011] NSWCCA 93 BP v R [2010] NSWCCA 159; 201 A Crim R 379 Bradlaugh v Gossett (1884) 12 QBD 271 Canada (House of Commons) v Vaid [2005] 1 SCR 667 Chan Tak Ming v Hong Kong Special Administrative Region (2010) 13 HKCFAR 745 Cheung v The Queen (2001) 209 CLR 1; [2001] HCA 67 Criminal Justice Commission v Nationwide News Pty Ltd (1994) 74 A Crim R 569 Dang v R [2014] NSWCCA 47 Dickson v R [2017] NSWCCA 78 Dinsdale v The Queen (2000) 202 CLR 321; [2000] HCA 54 Director of Public Prosecutions (Cth) v Couper [2013] VSCA 72; 229 A Crim R 115 Doyle v Falconer (1866) LR 1 PC 328 Egan v Chadwick (1999) 46 NSWLR 563; [1999] NSWCA 176 Egan v Willis (1996) 40 NSWLR 650 Egan v Willis (1998) 195 CLR 424; [1998] HCA 71 Egerton v Brownlow (1853) 4 HLC 1 Fenton v Hampton (1858) 11 Moo PC 347; 14 ER 727 Graham v The Queen [2016] HCA 27; (2016) 90 ALJR 820 Greenhalgh v R [2017] NSWCCA 94 Hadchiti v R [2016] NSWCCA 63 Harvey v New Brunswick (Attorney General) [1996] 2 SCR 876 Hili v The Queen; Jones v The Queen (2010) 242 CLR 520; [2010] HCA 45 Hong Kong Special Administrative Region v Ho Hung Kwan Michael (2013) 16 HKCFAR 525 Hong Kong Special Administrative Region v Wong Lin Kay (2012) 15 HKCFAR 185 Horne v Barber (1920) 27 CLR 494; [1920] HCA 33 House v The King (1936) 55 CLR 499; [1936] HCA 40 Janson v R [2013] NSWCCA 301 Jaturawong v R [2011] NSWCCA 168 Justins v The Queen (2010) 79 NSWLR 544; [2010] NSWCCA 242 Khoo v R [2013] NSWCCA 323; 237 A Crim R 221 Kielley v Carson (1842) 4 Moo PC 63; 13 ER 225 King v The Queen (2012) 245 CLR 588; [2012] HCA 24 Kinloch v The Secretary of State for India in Council (1882) 7 App Cas 619 Lin v Tasmania (2015) 252 A Crim R 64; [2015] TASCCA 13 Lowndes v The Queen (1999) 195 CLR 665; [1999] HCA 29 Markarian v The Queen (2005) 228 CLR 357; [2005] HCA 25 McCloy v Latham [2015] NSWSC 1782 McCloy v State of NSW (2015) 257 CLR 178; [2015] HCA 34 Mehajer v R [2014] NSWCCA 167 Morin v Crawford (1999) 29 CPC (4th) 362 Mulato v R [2006] NSWCCA 282 Nudd v The Queen [2006] HCA 9; (2006) 80 ALJR 614 Obeid v R (2015) 91 NSWLR 226; [2015] NSWCCA 309 Obeid v The Queen [2016] HCA 9; (2016) 90 ALJR 447 Perilya Broken Hill Ltd v Valuer-General [2015] NSWCA 400 Prebble v Television New Zealand Ltd [1995] 1 AC 321 President of the Legislative Council (SA) v Kosmas (2008) 175 IR 269 R v Boston (1923) 33 CLR 386; [1923] HCA 59 R v Boulanger [2006] 2 SCR 49 R v Caldwell [1982] AC 341 R v Chapman [2015] QB 883 R v Chaytor [2011] 1 AC 684 R v Coleman (1990) 19 NSWLR 467 R v CTG [2017] NSWCCA 163 R v Dytham [1979] QB 722 R v France [2016] 4 WLR 175 R v G [2004] 1 AC 1034 R v Greenway [1998] PL 357 R v Hannes [2002] NSWSC 1182 R v Hokin, Burton and Peisely (1922) 22 SR (NSW) 280 R v Isaacs (1997) 41 NSWLR 374 R v Macdonald; R v Maitland [2017] NSWSC 337 R v Macdonald; R v Maitland [2017] NSWSC 638 R v Norman [2017] 4 WLR 16 R v Obeid (No 12) [2016] NSWSC 1815 R v Obeid (No 2) [2015] NSWSC 1380 R v Ohar (2004) 59 NSWLR 596; [2004] NSWCCA 83 R v Parliamentary Commissioner for Standards; ex parte Al Fayed [1998] 1 WLR 669 R v Pilarinos [2002] BCSC 452 R v Quach (2010) 27 VR 310; [2010] VSCA 106 R v Rivkin (2004) 59 NSWLR 284; [2004] NSWCCA 7 R v Sorlie (1925) 25 SR NSW 532 R v Spathis [2001] NSWCCA 476 R v Stoddart (1909) 2 Cr App R 217 R v White (1875) 13 SCR (NSW) (L) 322 Rann v Olsen (2000) 76 SASR 450; [2000] SASC 83 Re Day (No 2) [2017] HCA 14; (2017) 91 ALJR 518 Rogers v The Queen (1994) 181 CLR 251; [1994] HCA 42 Shum Kwok Sher v Hong Kong Special Administrative Region (2002) 5 HKCFAR 381 Sin Kam Wah v Hong Kong Special Administrative Region (2005) 8 HKCFAR 192 Sneddon v State of NSW [2012] NSWCA 351 Tafler v British Columbia (Commissioner of Conflict of Interest) (1998) 161 DLR 4th 511 The Queen v Clarke (1954) 61 ALR 312 The Queen v Hoar (1981) 148 CLR 33; [1981] HCA 67 The Queen v Richards; ex parte Fitzpatrick and Browne (1955) 92 CLR 157; [1955] HCA 36 TKWJ v The Queen (2002) 212 CLR 124; [2002] HCA 46 United States v Brewster (1972) 408 US 501 Whitehouse v Carlton Hotel Pty Ltd (1987) 162 CLR 285; [1987] HCA 11 Wilkinson v Osborne (1915) 21 CLR 89; [1915] HCA 92 Willis v Perry (1912) 13 CLR 592; [1912] HCA 12 Wong v The Queen (2001) 207 CLR 584; [2001] HCA 64 Zaburoni v The Queen (2016) 256 CLR 482; [2016] HCA 12 Texts Cited: E Campbell, Parliamentary Privilege (2003, Federation Press) L Lovelock and J Evans, New South Wales Legislative Council Practice (2008, Federation Press) Category: Principal judgment Parties: Edward Moses Obeid (Applicant) Crown (Respondent) Attorney-General (Amicus Curiae) Representation: Counsel: G O'L Reynolds SC / G Rich SC / D Hume / P D Lange (Applicant) P Neil SC / V McWilliams / B Nahrula (Respondent) M G Sexton SC / A Mitchelmore (Attorney-General)