Day v Commissioner, Australian Federal Police [2000] FCA 1272
The communication of intercepted information to Customs was for a permitted purpose under s 67 and the applicable definition in s 5 of the TI Act, as the information was used in the preliminary investigation and decision-making process whether to lay charges, which falls within the meaning of 'investigation or inquiry' under a law of the Commonwealth.
- Jurisdiction
- Australia
- Judgment Date
- 11 September 2000
- Procedural Posture
- Appeal / Judgment on Appeal
- Outcome
- appeal dismissed with costs
- Legal Topics
- ['telecommunications Interception' 'disciplinary Proceedings in Public Service' 'statutory Interpretation']
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Judgment on Appeal
Legal Issues
- 1 ["Whether communication of intercepted telephone transcripts to Customs for disciplinary purposes was for a 'permitted purpose' under the Telecommunications (Interception) Act 1979 (Cth)" 'Whether there must be an investigation or inquiry under a law of the Commonwealth at the time of communication for s 67 of the TI Act to be satisfied' "Whether an 'investigation or inquiry' requires charges to be laid under s 61(2) of the Public Service Act 1922 (Cth) prior to the communication of information"]
Ratio Decidendi
The communication of intercepted information to Customs was for a permitted purpose under s 67 and the applicable definition in s 5 of the TI Act, as the information was used in the preliminary investigation and decision-making process whether to lay charges, which falls within the meaning of 'investigation or inquiry' under a law of the Commonwealth.
Court Disposition
appeal dismissed with costs
Orders
- ['The appeal be dismissed with costs.']
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment