R v AB; R v CD; R v EF [2023] NSWCCA 168

R v AB; R v CD; R v EF [2023] NSWCCA 168

The phrase 'to obtain or retain business' in s 70.2(1)(c)(i) of the Criminal Code (Cth) is not limited to directly obtaining or retaining business. The distinction between direct and indirect connection adopted by the trial judge is not warranted by the statutory language or extrinsic materials. Accordingly, agreements to provide payments for purposes such as remaining in a tender process or ensuring project smoothness may be capable, depending on the evidence, of amounting to agreements to provide a benefit in order to obtain or retain business under the relevant statutory provisions.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
30 June 2023
Procedural Posture
Appeal (legal Questions Reserved After Acquittal) / Determination of Legal Questions Under S 108(2) Crimes (appeal and Review) Act 2001 (nsw)
Outcome
Questions of law answered: No to all (i.e., the restricted interpretations proposed were rejected)
Legal Topics
['bribery of Foreign Public Officials' 'conspiracy' 'statutory Interpretation' 'elements of 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

Appeal (legal Questions Reserved After Acquittal) / Determination of Legal Questions Under S 108(2) Crimes (appeal and Review) Act 2001 (nsw)

  1. 1 ["Whether the phrase 'to obtain or retain business' in s 70.2(1)(c)(i) of the Criminal Code (Cth) is limited to directly obtaining or retaining business" 'Whether certain payments intended to affect tender process or project implementation can amount to agreements to provide benefits in order to obtain or retain business']

Ratio Decidendi

The phrase 'to obtain or retain business' in s 70.2(1)(c)(i) of the Criminal Code (Cth) is not limited to directly obtaining or retaining business. The distinction between direct and indirect connection adopted by the trial judge is not warranted by the statutory language or extrinsic materials. Accordingly, agreements to provide payments for purposes such as remaining in a tender process or ensuring project smoothness may be capable, depending on the evidence, of amounting to agreements to provide a benefit in order to obtain or retain business under the relevant statutory provisions.

Court Disposition

Questions of law answered: No to all (i.e., the restricted interpretations proposed were rejected)

Orders

  • ['Question 1: No' 'Question 2: No' 'Question 3: No']