WONG AND ANOR v COMPTROLLER GENERAL OF CUSTOMS [1998] NSWCA 266

WONG AND ANOR v COMPTROLLER GENERAL OF CUSTOMS [1998] NSWCA 266

The matters raised by the applicant do not have strong prospects of success, particularly on the nature of the proceedings and the validity of the s214 notice. The balance of convenience does not favour interrupting the trial with a stay pending appeal. The usual course should be followed, allowing proceedings to continue and reserving appeal rights for the conclusion of the case.

Parties
Claimant: Wong; Respondent: Comptroller General of Customs
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
06 May 1998
Procedural Posture
Application for Stay and Leave to Appeal / Interlocutory (application for Stay Pending Appeal From Interlocutory Judgment)
Outcome
Application dismissed with costs
Legal Topics
Admissibility of Evidence, Nature of Proceedings (civil or Criminal), Stays of Proceedings, Powers of Customs Officers, Self Incrimination
Customs Law Evidence Law Civil Procedure Admissibility of Evidence Nature of Proceedings (civil or Criminal) Stays of Proceedings Powers of Customs Officers Self Incrimination

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 3 Authorities cited 4 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Wong

Claimant

Comptroller General of Customs

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Application for Stay and Leave to Appeal / Interlocutory (application for Stay Pending Appeal From Interlocutory Judgment)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether proceedings under Pt14 of the Customs Act 1901 are civil or criminal in nature
  2. 2 Validity of s214 notices under the Customs Act 1901
  3. 3 Interrelationship of s69 with ss166–168 of the Evidence Act 1995 (NSW)

Ratio Decidendi

The matters raised by the applicant do not have strong prospects of success, particularly on the nature of the proceedings and the validity of the s214 notice. The balance of convenience does not favour interrupting the trial with a stay pending appeal. The usual course should be followed, allowing proceedings to continue and reserving appeal rights for the conclusion of the case.

Court Disposition

Application dismissed with costs

Orders

  • Notice of Motion dismissed with costs