Crump v New South Wales [2012] HCA 20

Crump v New South Wales [2012] HCA 20

Section 154A did not alter, vary or set aside the Supreme Court’s resentencing order; it changed only the legislative conditions by which the plaintiff might be considered for parole, which are always subject to amendment by Parliament. There is therefore no constitutional impediment to the validity of s 154A in its application to the plaintiff.

Parties
Plaintiff: Kevin Garry Crump; First Defendant: State of New South Wales; Second Defendant: New South Wales State Parole Authority; Intervener: Commonwealth of Australia; Intervener: State of Queensland; Intervener: State of Victoria; Intervener: State of Western Australia; Intervener: State of South Australia
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
04 May 2012
Procedural Posture
Special Case (constitutional Law) / Reserved Questions—full Court Determination
Outcome
Special Case answers: s 154A is not invalid in its application to the plaintiff; no order as to costs.
Legal Topics
Judicial Power of the Commonwealth, Ch III of the Constitution, Sentencing, Parole Eligibility, Legislative Interference With Judicial Decisions
Constitutional Law Criminal Law Judicial Power of the Commonwealth Ch III of the Constitution Sentencing Parole Eligibility Legislative Interference With Judicial Decisions

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 4 Authorities cited 27 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Kevin Garry Crump

Plaintiff

State of New South Wales

First Defendant

New South Wales State Parole Authority

Second Defendant

Commonwealth of Australia

Intervener

State of Queensland

Intervener

State of Victoria

Intervener

State of Western Australia

Intervener

State of South Australia

Intervener

Procedural Posture

Special Case (constitutional Law) / Reserved Questions—full Court Determination

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether s 154A of the Crimes (Administration of Sentences) Act 1999 (NSW) is invalid in its application to the plaintiff as altering or varying a judgment/order of the Supreme Court of NSW in a 'matter' within s 73 of the Constitution

Ratio Decidendi

Section 154A did not alter, vary or set aside the Supreme Court’s resentencing order; it changed only the legislative conditions by which the plaintiff might be considered for parole, which are always subject to amendment by Parliament. There is therefore no constitutional impediment to the validity of s 154A in its application to the plaintiff.

Court Disposition

Special Case answers: s 154A is not invalid in its application to the plaintiff; no order as to costs.

Orders

  • Question 1: Is s 154A of the Crimes (Administration of Sentences) Act 1999 (NSW), in its purported application to the plaintiff, invalid... ? Answer: No.
  • Question 2: Who should pay the costs of the special case? Answer: There should be no order as to costs.