Reardon v Magistrates' Court of Victoria

[2018] VSCA 76

Victorian Court of Appeal

Built by Barristers,
For Australian Law.

See how it works

Interrogate

Catchwords

1. Statutory Interpretation
2. › Construction of Commonwealth legislation
3. › Meaning of 'by reason only'
4. › Whether phrase confers broad immunity or limited immunity
5. › Role of word 'only' in defining scope of statutory provision
6. › Competition and Consumer Act 2010 (Cth), s 78
1. Competition Law
2. › Restrictive trade practices
3. › Secondary boycotts
4. › Immunity from criminal prosecution
5. › Whether s 78 of Competition and Consumer Act 2010 (Cth) immunises conduct constituting ancillary contravention of Part IV from prosecution for separate criminal offence
6. › Whether elements of blackmail coterminous with elements of ancillary contravention
7. › Competition and Consumer Act 2010 (Cth), ss 45D, 45E, 76, 77, 78, 79
1. Criminal Law
2. › Blackmail
3. › Whether charges invalid by reason of statutory immunity
4. › Whether conduct alleged to constitute blackmail also constituting ancillary contravention of Part IV of Competition and Consumer Act 2010 (Cth) attracted immunity under s 78
5. › Crimes Act 1958 (Vic), s 87
1. Administrative Law
2. › Judicial review
3. › Procedural fairness
4. › Judge relying on documents obtained after hearing without informing parties
5. › Whether denial of procedural fairness could have affected outcome
6. › Futility of remitting matter where outcome would not differ

Quick Take

Section 78 of the Competition and Consumer Act 2010 (Cth) does not confer a broad immunity from criminal prosecution for conduct that happens to fall within Part IV. The immunity is confined to offences whose elements are, at least in substance, the same as the elements of a contravention or ancillary contravention of Part IV. Accordingly, persons whose conduct constitutes both a Part IV contravention and a separate criminal offence (such as blackmail, threats to kill, or using obscene language) may be prosecuted for the criminal offence. The question whether s 78 immunity applies where a Part IV contravention is relied upon as part of proving a criminal case was left open.