The Queen v. Hoar, Donald Edgar & Anor [1981] FCA 19

The Queen v. Hoar, Donald Edgar & Anor [1981] FCA 19

The forfeiture order was invalid as the conviction for conspiracy was not for an offence in connection with which the property was seized; the trial judge erred by unduly limiting sentence to the maximum penalty for a single offence under the Fisheries Act rather than the conspiracy under the Criminal Law and Procedure Act, and by consideration of defence costs in mitigation. More severe sentences reflecting the seriousness of the conspiracy and the impact on community resources were appropriate.

Parties
Appellant: THE QUEEN; Respondent: DONALD EDGAR HOAR; Respondent: JACK HARRY NOBLE; Appellant: DONALD EDGAR HOAR; Respondent: THE QUEEN
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
10 March 1981
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Appeal From Supreme Court of the Northern Territory
Outcome
appeals allowed; sentences set aside and new sentences imposed; forfeiture order set aside
Legal Topics
Conspiracy, Sentencing, Forfeiture, Conditional Release
Criminal Law Fisheries Law Conspiracy Sentencing Forfeiture Conditional Release

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 5 Authorities cited 7 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 5
Sign in to unlock

Parties

THE QUEEN

Appellant

DONALD EDGAR HOAR

Respondent

JACK HARRY NOBLE

Respondent

DONALD EDGAR HOAR

Appellant

THE QUEEN

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Appeal From Supreme Court of the Northern Territory

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Was there error in the trial judge's determination of penalties for conspiracy to fish during prohibited periods and at prohibited places?
  2. 2 Was the forfeiture order valid under the Fisheries Act?
  3. 3 Did the trial judge err in taking into account losses from seizure, legal costs, and character evidence?

Ratio Decidendi

The forfeiture order was invalid as the conviction for conspiracy was not for an offence in connection with which the property was seized; the trial judge erred by unduly limiting sentence to the maximum penalty for a single offence under the Fisheries Act rather than the conspiracy under the Criminal Law and Procedure Act, and by consideration of defence costs in mitigation. More severe sentences reflecting the seriousness of the conspiracy and the impact on community resources were appropriate.

Court Disposition

appeals allowed; sentences set aside and new sentences imposed; forfeiture order set aside

Orders

  • Donald Edgar Hoar to be imprisoned with hard labour for 14 calendar months, not eligible for parole until 6 calendar months served
  • Jack Harry Noble to be imprisoned with hard labour for 12 calendar months, not eligible for parole until 5 calendar months served