Alexander v Donohoe [1906] HCA 86
The High Court has power under sec. 37 of the Judiciary Act 1903 to amend a conviction by adding a term of imprisonment in the alternative; as neither party sought this amendment, the appeal was dismissed and the conviction was not disturbed.
- Parties
- Appellant; Defendant: Alexander; Respondent; Complainant: Donohoe
- Jurisdiction
- Australia
- Judgment Date
- 21 December 1906
- Procedural Posture
- Prohibition (treated as Appeal) / High Court Appellate Review
- Outcome
- appeal dismissed with costs
- Legal Topics
- Immigration Restriction, Jurisdiction of Magistrates, Summary Conviction, Penalty Enforcement, Appellate Procedure, Costs, Amendment of Convictions
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Alexander
Appellant; Defendant
Donohoe
Respondent; Complainant
Procedural Posture
Prohibition (treated as Appeal) / High Court Appellate Review
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether a magistrate has jurisdiction to award costs when exercising federal jurisdiction under the Immigration Restriction Acts.
- 2 Whether a conviction under sec. 9 of the Immigration Restriction Act 1901 is defective if it fails to impose a term of imprisonment in default of payment of a fine.
- 3 Whether the High Court has power under sec. 37 of the Judiciary Act 1903 to amend such a conviction.
Ratio Decidendi
The High Court has power under sec. 37 of the Judiciary Act 1903 to amend a conviction by adding a term of imprisonment in the alternative; as neither party sought this amendment, the appeal was dismissed and the conviction was not disturbed.
Court Disposition
appeal dismissed with costs
Orders
- Appeal dismissed.
- Conviction stands.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment