Korczynski, W. v. Quik Foods Pty Ltd & Ors [1985] FCA 99

Korczynski, W. v. Quik Foods Pty Ltd & Ors [1985] FCA 99

The authority issued by the Attorney-General to the Minister of State for Home Affairs and Environment was a valid authority under s.163(4)(b) as it sufficiently identifies a 'person' as the holder of the office. The dismissal of the informations was not an acquittal after hearing on the merits but was based on a...

Source-derived case information.

Parties
Appellant: Walter Korczynski; Respondent: Quik Foods Pty Ltd; Respondent: James Arthur Daemar; Respondent: Otto Erhard Sickinger
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
20 March 1985
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Judgment After Hearing of Appeal
Outcome
Appeal allowed
Legal Topics
Authority to Prosecute, Jurisdiction, Standing to Appeal, Validity of Ministerial Consent
Trade Practices Authority to Prosecute Jurisdiction Standing to Appeal Validity of Ministerial Consent

Source-derived case record

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 9 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Walter Korczynski

Appellant

Quik Foods Pty Ltd

Respondent

James Arthur Daemar

Respondent

Otto Erhard Sickinger

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Appeal / Judgment After Hearing of Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether an authority addressed to the Minister of State for Home Affairs & Environment was an authority to 'a person' within the meaning of s.163(4)(b) of the Trade Practices Act 1974
  2. 2 Whether dismissal of proceedings for lack of valid authority constituted an acquittal after a hearing on the merits
  3. 3 Whether the prosecutor had standing to bring the appeal

Ratio Decidendi

The authority issued by the Attorney-General to the Minister of State for Home Affairs and Environment was a valid authority under s.163(4)(b) as it sufficiently identifies a 'person' as the holder of the office. The dismissal of the informations was not an acquittal after hearing on the merits but was based on a jurisdictional point. Therefore, the appeal was competent and should be allowed.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed

Orders

  • The appeal be allowed and the orders below be set aside.
  • The informations being V.G. Nos. 183 - 198 of 1983 (inclusive) be remitted to the Federal Court of Australia constituted by a single Judge for hearing and determination.