The power to dismiss a conspiracy charge under s 11.5(6) of the Criminal Code Act 1995 (Cth) requires the interests of justice to 'require' dismissal, connoting a course that is necessary or imperative rather than merely preferable. The availability of sufficient and effective substantive charges is the beginning of the inquiry, not the inquiry itself, and must not be elevated to a position of primacy that obscures the broader interests of justice assessment. A conspiracy charge directed at an ongoing, open-ended criminal enterprise contemplating multiple consignments is not subsumed by substantive charges relating to individual completed importations. The standard of appellate review for s 11.5(6) decisions was left open, with the Court signalling that the correctness standard may apply following GLJ.
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 3 later cases that cite this judgment.
3 of the 3 citing cases carry a classified treatment. How each court treated it is available to signed-in members.