"Z" v "N" [2004] NSWCA 445

"Z" v "N" [2004] NSWCA 445

The appeal was incompetent without leave under s 101(2)(r). Leave was refused because the majority considered the appellant's critical argument untenable: s 18B(4) empowered the Commission to require a legal practitioner to furnish the name and address of the relevant person even where disclosure would or might otherwise attract client legal privilege, and the presiding member exercised the discretion on the assumption that privilege might apply, so no miscarriage of discretion was shown. The appeal was dismissed with costs.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
19 November 2004
Procedural Posture
Appeal/application for Leave to Appeal From Dismissal of Summons Seeking Review of New South Wales Crime Commission Decisions / Court of Appeal; Leave to Appeal Refused and Appeal Dismissed
Outcome
Appeal dismissed with costs; leave to appeal refused.
Legal Topics
['new South Wales Crime Commission Investigatory Powers' 'requirement for Lawyer to Provide Client Name and Address' 'client Legal Privilege' 'leave to Appeal' 'discretionary Power Under S 18 B(4)']
['administrative Law' 'criminal Law' 'legal Professional Privilege' 'civil Procedure'] ['new South Wales Crime Commission Investigatory Powers' 'requirement for Lawyer to Provide Client Name and Address' 'client Legal Privilege' 'leave to Appeal' 'discretionary Power Under S 18 B(4)']

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/application for Leave to Appeal From Dismissal of Summons Seeking Review of New South Wales Crime Commission Decisions / Court of Appeal; Leave to Appeal Refused and Appeal Dismissed

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the appeal to the Court of Appeal lay as of right or required leave under s 101(2)(r) of the Supreme Court Act.' 'Whether s 18B(4) of the New South Wales Crime Commission Act 1985 empowered the presiding member to require a legal practitioner to furnish the name and address of a person to whom or by whom a privileged communication was made where that information was or might be privileged.' "Whether the Commission's discretion under s 18B(4) miscarried because of an earlier ruling that privilege was not involved."]

Ratio Decidendi

The appeal was incompetent without leave under s 101(2)(r). Leave was refused because the majority considered the appellant's critical argument untenable: s 18B(4) empowered the Commission to require a legal practitioner to furnish the name and address of the relevant person even where disclosure would or might otherwise attract client legal privilege, and the presiding member exercised the discretion on the assumption that privilege might apply, so no miscarriage of discretion was shown. The appeal was dismissed with costs.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed with costs; leave to appeal refused.

Orders

  • ['Appeal dismissed with costs.' 'Leave to appeal refused.' 'Undertaking given on behalf of the appellant noted.' 'The record of the proceedings in this Court including the judgment is to change the parties\' names so that they read "Z" v "N".' 'The entirety of the proceedings took place in camera.' "When the reasons...