Foord, J.M. v. Whiddett, A.M. & Anor [1985] FCA 179

Foord, J.M. v. Whiddett, A.M. & Anor [1985] FCA 179

There was evidence—taken at its highest for the prosecution—from which a magistrate could find both the requisite intention and a tendency to pervert the course of justice under s.43 Crimes Act 1914 (Cth), even though the alleged intermediary (Mr Briese) was not the committing magistrate and did not act upon the request. The offence does not require actual interference with a judicial officer, only that the conduct had a real tendency to interfere with or obstruct the course of justice related to federal judicial power. Accordingly, there was no jurisdictional error in the committal magistrate’s decision, and the application for judicial review should be dismissed, both on the merits and...

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
14 May 1985
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review Application / Judgment on Application for Judicial Review of Committal Decision
Outcome
Application dismissed with costs
Legal Topics
['attempting to Pervert the Course of Justice' 'judicial Review of Committal Proceedings' 'interpretation of S.43 Crimes Act 1914 (cth)' 'prima Facie Case Test at Committal' 'jurisdictional Errors']
['criminal Law' 'administrative Law'] ['attempting to Pervert the Course of Justice' 'judicial Review of Committal Proceedings' 'interpretation of S.43 Crimes Act 1914 (cth)' 'prima Facie Case Test at Committal' 'jurisdictional Errors']

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

Judicial Review Application / Judgment on Application for Judicial Review of Committal Decision

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether there was evidence on which a prima facie case could be found for the charge of attempting to pervert the course of justice under s.43 Crimes Act 1914 (Cth)' "Whether the alleged offence was committed 'in relation to the judicial power of the Commonwealth'"]

Ratio Decidendi

There was evidence—taken at its highest for the prosecution—from which a magistrate could find both the requisite intention and a tendency to pervert the course of justice under s.43 Crimes Act 1914 (Cth), even though the alleged intermediary (Mr Briese) was not the committing magistrate and did not act upon the request. The offence does not require actual interference with a judicial officer, only that the conduct had a real tendency to interfere with or obstruct the course of justice related to federal judicial power. Accordingly, there was no jurisdictional error in the committal magistrate’s decision, and the application for judicial review should be dismissed, both on the merits and...

Court Disposition

Application dismissed with costs

Orders

  • ['The application be dismissed.' "The applicant pay the respondents' costs thereof."]