Markisic & Anor v Vizza & Ors [2001] NSWSC 1155

Markisic & Anor v Vizza & Ors [2001] NSWSC 1155

None of the offences alleged in paragraphs 1(a) to 1(q) of the Amended Summons was within Schedule 10 to the Crimes Act 1900 (NSW), and no other legislation authorised prosecution of those matters in the Supreme Court's summary jurisdiction. The Supreme Court was not relevantly a court of summary jurisdiction for...

Source-derived case information.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
14 December 2001
Procedural Posture
Application Under the Supreme Court (summary Jurisdiction) Act 1967 for Defendants to Be Dealt With for Alleged Offences / Notices of Motion to Strike Out the Amended Summons
Outcome
The Amended Summons was struck out and the first and second prosecutors were ordered to pay the defendants' costs.
Legal Topics
["scope of the Supreme Court's Summary Jurisdiction" 'whether Alleged State and Commonwealth Offences Could Be Prosecuted Summarily in the Supreme Court' 'exercise of Federal Jurisdiction by State Courts' 'family Law Act Contravention and Contempt Allegations']
['criminal Procedure' 'summary Jurisdiction' 'federal Jurisdiction' 'family Law'] ["scope of the Supreme Court's Summary Jurisdiction" 'whether Alleged State and Commonwealth Offences Could Be Prosecuted Summarily in the Supreme Court' 'exercise of Federal Jurisdiction by State Courts' 'family Law Act Contravention and Contempt Allegations']

Source-derived case record

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 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Procedural Posture

Application Under the Supreme Court (summary Jurisdiction) Act 1967 for Defendants to Be Dealt With for Alleged Offences / Notices of Motion to Strike Out the Amended Summons

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the Supreme Court of New South Wales had summary jurisdiction under the Supreme Court (Summary Jurisdiction) Act 1967 to hear and determine the offences alleged in the Amended Summons.' 'Whether any of the alleged offences were within Schedule 10 to the Crimes Act 1900 (NSW) or otherwise authorised by legislation to be prosecuted summarily in the Supreme Court.' 'Whether the Supreme Court was a court of summary jurisdiction for the purposes of the Commonwealth offences and the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth).' 'Whether the Supreme Court had jurisdiction under the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth) to deal with alleged contraventions or contempt of the Family Court.']

Ratio Decidendi

None of the offences alleged in paragraphs 1(a) to 1(q) of the Amended Summons was within Schedule 10 to the Crimes Act 1900 (NSW), and no other legislation authorised prosecution of those matters in the Supreme Court's summary jurisdiction. The Supreme Court was not relevantly a court of summary jurisdiction for the Commonwealth provisions relied on, and did not have jurisdiction under the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth) to deal with alleged contraventions or contempt of the Family Court. Accordingly the Court had no jurisdiction to entertain the proceedings and the Amended Summons was struck out.

Court Disposition

The Amended Summons was struck out and the first and second prosecutors were ordered to pay the defendants' costs.

Orders

  • ['The Amended Summons is struck out.' 'Order the first and second prosecutors to pay the defendants costs.']