Happy Cruising Pty Ltd v Magistrates Court of Western Australia

[2025] WASCA 106

Western Australia Court of Appeal

Built by Barristers,
For Australian Law.

See how it works

Interrogate

Catchwords

1. Criminal Law
2. › Double jeopardy
3. › Autrefois convict
4. › Whether two convictions for same type of continuing unlawful land use during different non-overlapping periods constitute same offence
5. › Whether dates of offending are immaterial to comparison of elements
6. › Criminal Code (WA), s 17
7. › Planning and Development Act 2005 (WA), s 218(b)
1. Criminal Law
2. › Sentencing
3. › Double punishment
4. › Whether rule against double punishment engaged where offences relate to different non-overlapping periods
5. › Whether factual overlap existed between offences
6. › Sentencing Act 1995 (WA), s 11
1. Practice and Procedure
2. › Declaratory relief
3. › Judicial review of criminal conviction
4. › Whether declaration that appellant twice convicted of same offence would impugn finality of conviction
5. › Principle of incontrovertibility
6. › Whether discretion to grant declaration should be exercised where double jeopardy not raised in prior appeals
1. Planning and Development
2. › Offences
3. › Unauthorised use of land
4. › Whether offence of using land otherwise than in accordance with planning scheme is a continuing offence that can only be prosecuted once
5. › Meaning of 'use' and 'development'
6. › Planning and Development Act 2005 (WA), ss 4, 218(b)

Quick Take

Successive prosecutions for unlawful use of land under s 218(b) of the Planning and Development Act 2005 (WA) during different, non-overlapping time periods do not engage double jeopardy or double punishment principles, even where the character of the use is the same on each occasion.