Djou v Commonwealth Department of Fisheries

(2004) 29 WAR 216; [2004] WASCA 282

Western Australia Court of Appeal

Built by Barristers,
For Australian Law.

See how it works

Catchwords

1. Criminal Law
2. › Sentencing
3. › Fines
4. › Impecunious offender
5. › Whether fine may be imposed where offender has no capacity to pay
6. › Whether default imprisonment period excessive
7. › Fisheries Management Act 1991 (Cth), ss 100(2), 101(2)
1. Criminal Law
2. › Sentencing
3. › Fines
4. › Default imprisonment
5. › Basis of fixing default period
6. › Relationship between fine amount and default period
7. › Fines, Penalties and Infringement Notices Enforcement Act 1994 (WA), s 53(3)(a)
1. Criminal Law
2. › Sentencing
3. › Foreign fishing offences
4. › Imprisonment not available as sentencing option
5. › Whether fine may be reverse-engineered from desired imprisonment term
6. › UNCLOS Article 73(3)
7. › Fisheries Management Act 1991 (Cth), ss 100(4), 101(4)
1. Criminal Law
2. › Sentencing
3. › Consistency
4. › Federal offences
5. › Whether courts should have regard to sentences imposed in other jurisdictions for same federal offence

Quick Take

Where imprisonment is not an available sentencing option under the Fisheries Management Act 1991 (Cth), a fine must not be imposed or increased to achieve a desired period of default imprisonment. The default period must relate to the monetary amount of the fine, calculated using the statutory divisor ($150 per day under s 53(3)(a) of the Fines, Penalties and Infringement Notices Enforcement Act 1994 (WA)). Courts sentencing for federal fisheries offences should have regard to sentences imposed in other Australian jurisdictions to achieve consistency.