R v BB [2019] NSWSC 1054

R v BB [2019] NSWSC 1054

For an individual charged under s 27(1) of the Charter of the United Nations Act 1945 (Cth) with contravening the Iran Sanctions Regulations, the alleged supply is conduct requiring intention. The fact that the goods are export sanctioned goods under reg 7(b) is a circumstance, not an element made strict or absolute liability, and therefore requires a fault element. Applying s 5.6(2) of the Criminal Code (Cth), the applicable fault element for that circumstance is recklessness, which may be satisfied by proof of intention, knowledge or recklessness. The Crown must therefore prove intentional supply, knowledge of the nickel content and transfer to Iran, and recklessness as to whether the...

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
15 August 2019
Procedural Posture
Criminal Proceedings for Two Counts of Breaching the Charter of the United Nations (sanctions – Iran) Regulations 2008 (cth) / Procedural Ruling on the Elements the Crown Must Prove
Outcome
The Court gave a procedural ruling directing the elements the Crown must prove in the proceedings.
Legal Topics
['breach of U.n. Sanctions' 'supply of Sanctioned Goods to Iran' 'charter of the United Nations (sanctions – Iran) Regulations 2008 (cth)' 'criminal Code (cth) Physical Elements and Fault Elements' 'recklessness' 'coincidence of Physical and Fault Elements']
['criminal Law' 'criminal Procedure' 'commonwealth Sanctions Law'] ['breach of U.n. Sanctions' 'supply of Sanctioned Goods to Iran' 'charter of the United Nations (sanctions – Iran) Regulations 2008 (cth)' 'criminal Code (cth) Physical Elements and Fault Elements' 'recklessness' 'coincidence of Physical and Fault Elements']

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 1 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 1 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Procedural Posture

Criminal Proceedings for Two Counts of Breaching the Charter of the United Nations (sanctions – Iran) Regulations 2008 (cth) / Procedural Ruling on the Elements the Crown Must Prove

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['What physical and fault elements must be proved for an individual offence under s 27(1) of the Charter of the United Nations Act 1945 (Cth) involving an alleged sanctioned supply to Iran.' 'Whether the circumstance that goods are export sanctioned goods under reg 7(b) of the Charter of the United Nations (Sanctions – Iran) Regulations 2008 (Cth) requires a fault element.' 'What fault element applies to the alleged circumstance that the goods supplied were sanctioned goods and that the supply was not authorised.']

Ratio Decidendi

For an individual charged under s 27(1) of the Charter of the United Nations Act 1945 (Cth) with contravening the Iran Sanctions Regulations, the alleged supply is conduct requiring intention. The fact that the goods are export sanctioned goods under reg 7(b) is a circumstance, not an element made strict or absolute liability, and therefore requires a fault element. Applying s 5.6(2) of the Criminal Code (Cth), the applicable fault element for that circumstance is recklessness, which may be satisfied by proof of intention, knowledge or recklessness. The Crown must therefore prove intentional supply, knowledge of the nickel content and transfer to Iran, and recklessness as to whether the...

Court Disposition

The Court gave a procedural ruling directing the elements the Crown must prove in the proceedings.

Orders

  • ['The Court directs that the Crown, in these proceedings, must prove, at the requisite standard, that the accused intended to make a supply.' 'The Court directs that the Crown must prove that the accused acted with knowledge that the goods to be supplied consisted of a metal with a content of nickel greater than 25%...