Joyce v Grimshaw [2001] FCA 52

Joyce v Grimshaw [2001] FCA 52

CASA was not imposed upon within the meaning of s 29B because it was not deceived or misled by anything said or done by the respondent. The fact that CASA may have been placed under a burden or disadvantage as a result of an untrue representation made to Shell or petrol vendors was insufficient to establish the charged offences of imposition. Crispin J was correct to follow Guillot v Hender and to set aside the convictions.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
16 February 2001
Procedural Posture
Criminal Law Appeal Concerning Convictions for Imposition Under S 29 B of the Crimes Act 1914 (cth) / Appeal to the Federal Court of Australia From a Judge of the Supreme Court of the Australian Capital Territory
Outcome
Appeal dismissed.
Legal Topics
['imposition Under S 29 B of the Crimes Act 1914 (cth)' 'false Representation' 'whether Commonwealth or Public Authority Must Be Deceived or Misled' 'representations Made to Third Parties' 'meaning of "imposes or Endeavours to Impose Upon"']
['criminal Law' 'statutory Interpretation'] ['imposition Under S 29 B of the Crimes Act 1914 (cth)' 'false Representation' 'whether Commonwealth or Public Authority Must Be Deceived or Misled' 'representations Made to Third Parties' 'meaning of "imposes or Endeavours to Impose Upon"']

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 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Procedural Posture

Criminal Law Appeal Concerning Convictions for Imposition Under S 29 B of the Crimes Act 1914 (cth) / Appeal to the Federal Court of Australia From a Judge of the Supreme Court of the Australian Capital Territory

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether an untrue representation made to a third party can constitute imposition upon the Commonwealth or a public authority under the Commonwealth under s 29B of the Crimes Act 1914 (Cth).' 'Whether, for an offence of imposition as distinct from endeavouring to impose under s 29B, the Commonwealth or relevant public authority must actually be deceived or misled.' 'Whether placing a burden or disadvantage on a public authority is sufficient to establish imposition under s 29B without proof that the authority was deceived or misled.']

Ratio Decidendi

CASA was not imposed upon within the meaning of s 29B because it was not deceived or misled by anything said or done by the respondent. The fact that CASA may have been placed under a burden or disadvantage as a result of an untrue representation made to Shell or petrol vendors was insufficient to establish the charged offences of imposition. Crispin J was correct to follow Guillot v Hender and to set aside the convictions.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed.

Orders

  • ['The appeal be dismissed.' 'The parties file and serve written submissions in relation to the question of costs of this appeal within fourteen (14) days of the date of delivery of this judgment.']