Criminal Code 2002

The required geographical nexus is conclusively presumed for an offence unless rebutted under subsection (2) or (4).

If a person charged with an offence disputes the existence of the required geographical nexus for the offence, the following provisions apply:

the court must proceed with the trial of the offence in the usual way;

if, at the end of the trial, the trier of fact is satisfied on the balance of probabilities that the required geographical nexus does not exist, it must make or return a finding to that effect, and the court must dismiss the charge;

however, if, disregarding any geographical considerations, the trier of fact would find the person not guilty of the offence (other than because of mental impairment), it must make or return a verdict of not guilty;

also, if, disregarding any geographical considerations, the trier of fact would find the person not guilty of the offence only because of mental impairment, it must make or return a verdict that the person is not guilty of the offence because of mental impairment.

This section applies to any alternative verdict available by law to the trier of fact in relation to another offence with which the person was not charged.

The trier of fact may make or return a finding of guilty in relation to the other offence (mentioned in subsection (3)) unless satisfied on the balance of probabilities that the required geographical nexus does not exist for the other offence.

If the issue of whether the required geographical nexus exists for an offence is raised before the trial (including at a special hearing under the Crimes Act 1900, section 316), the issue must be reserved for consideration at the trial.