Price v Elder [1999] FCA 1353

Price v Elder [1999] FCA 1353

The applications failed because the omission of details of the applicant's prior ATO contacts was not misleading, fraudulent or in bad faith and was not material to the issuing officers' statutory satisfaction; the earlier unsworn draft warrant materials given to Ms Elder were not applications under the Crimes Act 1914 (Cth) and did not have to be disclosed; and the informations adequately identified alleged offences, with ample material to support the issuing officers' satisfaction and no invalidity arising from any imprecision in the statement of the offence.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
01 October 1999
Procedural Posture
Applications Under the Administrative Decisions (judicial Review) Act 1977 and S 39 B of the Judiciary Act 1903 Seeking to Quash Search Warrants or Decisions to Issue Them and Consequential Relief / Final Judgment on Amended Applications
Outcome
Applications dismissed with costs.
Legal Topics
['search Warrants' 'judicial Review' 'relevant and Irrelevant Considerations' 'good Faith and Non Disclosure' 'prior Warrant Applications' 'statement of Indictable Offence']
['administrative Law' 'criminal Procedure'] ['search Warrants' 'judicial Review' 'relevant and Irrelevant Considerations' 'good Faith and Non Disclosure' 'prior Warrant Applications' 'statement of Indictable Offence']

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

Applications Under the Administrative Decisions (judicial Review) Act 1977 and S 39 B of the Judiciary Act 1903 Seeking to Quash Search Warrants or Decisions to Issue Them and Consequential Relief / Final Judgment on Amended Applications

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether the issuing officers improperly exercised their power because the informations did not disclose the applicant's prior dealings with the Australian Taxation Office" 'Whether the informants failed to disclose prior applications for the same or similar warrants contrary to s 3E(4) of the Crimes Act 1914 (Cth)' 'Whether the warrants were invalid because they failed to disclose an indictable offence or because their true purpose differed from the stated offence' 'Whether the Court could have regard to the unexpurgated informations']

Ratio Decidendi

The applications failed because the omission of details of the applicant's prior ATO contacts was not misleading, fraudulent or in bad faith and was not material to the issuing officers' statutory satisfaction; the earlier unsworn draft warrant materials given to Ms Elder were not applications under the Crimes Act 1914 (Cth) and did not have to be disclosed; and the informations adequately identified alleged offences, with ample material to support the issuing officers' satisfaction and no invalidity arising from any imprecision in the statement of the offence.

Court Disposition

Applications dismissed with costs.

Orders

  • ['The further amended application in NG 631/98 dated 14 August 1998, the amended application in NG 678/98 dated 14 August 1998 and the application in NG 651/98 dated 1 July 1998 of the applicant be dismissed with costs.']