Attorney General of New South Wales v Chiew Seng Liew [2012] NSWSC 1223

Attorney General of New South Wales v Chiew Seng Liew [2012] NSWSC 1223

The Operating Guidelines were not proved to be guidelines in force under s 185A because there was no evidence they were established in consultation with the Minister, and s 135(2)(k) did not make them mandatory considerations. The Authority was required to consider deportation insofar as deportation was relevant to the statutory criteria and because the State's submissions on deportation had to be taken into account under s 153(2). On a fair reading of the reasons, including the summary of submissions, the references to deportation, condition 32, and the Authority's treatment of Mr Liew's medical condition and risk, the Attorney General did not prove that the Authority failed to consider...

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
11 October 2012
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review of State Parole Authority Decision to Grant Parole / Principal Judgment on Further Amended Summons
Outcome
Further Amended Summons dismissed.
Legal Topics
['jurisdictional Error' 'error of Law on the Face of the Record' 'mandatory Relevant Considerations' 'adequacy of Reasons' 'deportation and Parole' 'certiorari and Mandamus' 'costs']
['administrative Law' 'judicial Review' 'criminal Law' 'parole'] ['jurisdictional Error' 'error of Law on the Face of the Record' 'mandatory Relevant Considerations' 'adequacy of Reasons' 'deportation and Parole' 'certiorari and Mandamus' 'costs']

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 of State Parole Authority Decision to Grant Parole / Principal Judgment on Further Amended Summons

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether the State Parole Authority failed to consider the issue of Mr Liew's deportation when deciding to grant parole." "Whether the Authority's Operating Guidelines constituted guidelines in force under s 185A of the Crimes (Administration of Sentences) Act 1999 and therefore mandatory considerations under s 135(2)(j)." 'Whether s 135(2)(k) made matters in the Operating Guidelines mandatory considerations.' "Whether the Authority was otherwise obliged to take into account the State's submissions about deportation under s 153(2)." "Whether the Authority's recorded reasons were inadequate under s 193C of the Crimes (Administration of Sentences) Act 1999." 'Whether failure to provide adequate reasons would entitle the Attorney General to certiorari or other relief.']

Ratio Decidendi

The Operating Guidelines were not proved to be guidelines in force under s 185A because there was no evidence they were established in consultation with the Minister, and s 135(2)(k) did not make them mandatory considerations. The Authority was required to consider deportation insofar as deportation was relevant to the statutory criteria and because the State's submissions on deportation had to be taken into account under s 153(2). On a fair reading of the reasons, including the summary of submissions, the references to deportation, condition 32, and the Authority's treatment of Mr Liew's medical condition and risk, the Attorney General did not prove that the Authority failed to consider...

Court Disposition

Further Amended Summons dismissed.

Orders

  • ['The Further Amended Summons be dismissed.' "The Plaintiff pay the First Defendant's costs of the proceedings." 'The order made on 9 October 2012 staying the decision of the Second Defendant dated 19 September 2012 be discharged.']