Commonwealth Director of Public Prosecutions v Phillips [2009] QDC 42
1-1
[2009] QDC 42
DISTRICT COURT
CIVIL JURISDICTION
JUDGE ROBIN QC
No 2344 of 2008
COMMONWEALTH DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC
PROSECUTIONS Applicant
and
LAWRENCE JAMES PHILLIPS Respondent
BRISBANE
..DATE 29/01/2009
ORDER
CATCHWORDS: Application for a pecuniary penalty against a
convicted offender set down for hearing, given failure of
respondent to file within times allowed by earlier directions
(or at all) response material or foreshadowed material
relating to challenge to the admissibility of the applicant's
evidence.
-- 1 of 5 --
1-2 ORDER
1
10
20
30
40
50
60
HIS HONOUR: This is a mention of an application brought by
the Commonwealth Director of Public Prosecutions seeking the
imposition of a pecuniary penalty. The respondent, for his
offending which was by way of running an investment scheme
unlawfully, has served the custody to which he was sentenced.
At bottom the idea of the pecuniary penalty is to divest the
respondent of his ill-gotten gains. A financial expert who
scrutinised the evidence which was given in the underlying
criminal proceeding has made an estimate that a sum of
$400,000 or so is the appropriate one for Mr Phillips. The
calculation had to take account of factors such as his not
being the only person who gained from the unlawful management
investment scheme.
There's been a series of orders made by consent in the Court's
management of this proceeding. The first was on the 23rd of
September 2008 by Judge McGill, a consent order when Mr
Phillips was represented by a person called Wallice,,
according to the Court's order sheet. A hearing date of 23rd
September 2008 had been fixed for the hearing of the pecuniary
penalty application which was filed on the 29th of August
2008. A mention was listed for 10 a.m. on the 4th of November
2008. The respondent was required to file and serve on the
applicant any material intended to be relied on in response to
the application no later than 4 p.m. on 21st of October 2008.
...
-- 2 of 5 --
1-3 ORDER
1
10
20
30
40
50
60
The matter next came before the Registrar who made a consent
order under rule 666 on the basis of signatures of lawyers on
both sides adjourning the pecuniary penalty application to the
17th of December 2008 for mention. The respondent was
required to file and serve any response material by the 11th
of December 2008, the date of that order being 30th of October
2008. The sealed copy of the order is dated the following
date and is document 12 on the Court file.
On the 17th of December 2008 Judge Noud made a further order
by consent when Ms Marshall, who represents the applicant
today, appeared and also Mr Lawler, a solicitor, I believe a
town agent for the principals in Adelaide, for the respondent.
That order fixed a mention for today and also required the
respondent to file and serve any material upon which he seeks
to rely in response to the application for a pecuniary penalty
order including any material purporting to challenge the
admissibility of documents relied on by the applicant, but
excluding the forensic accountant's report, no later than
4 p.m. on Friday the 23rd of January 2009.
That last-mentioned date has come and gone with no material
filed.
...
HIS HONOUR: There's been no appearance by Mr Lawler who can
be taken to have known that today's mention would be coming
on. There's no reason, it seems to me, to think that the
-- 3 of 5 --
1-4 ORDER
1
10
20
30
40
50
60
respondent is serious about filing material, he being
successful in achieving delay to this point. Ms Marshall has
informed the Court that there might be arguments that could be
invoked on behalf of Mr Phillips regarding the admissibility
of certain material that came from New Zealand authorities and
may well have been obtained and transmitted under measures
which some might think draconian to get to the bottom of
matters in relation to various kinds of activities adjudged
criminal.
I'm sympathetic to Ms Marshall's desire to have the principal
application listed for a hearing - which will return the
applicant to the situation before the 23rd of September 2008.
As I say, nothing's happened to indicate that anything has
been done in the months that have been allowed to elapse by or
on behalf of the defendant to protect his position or advance
the determination of the application.
...
HIS HONOUR: I'm grateful to the Civil List Manager for
attending in Court to advise what dates were available for
hearing and, in the circumstances, will fix the 16th of March
2009 for hearing of the - it's called a pecuniary penalty
application.
MS MARSHALL: Correct, your Honour.
HIS HONOUR: And I'll say it in its entirety.
-- 4 of 5 --
29012009 D.1 T(3)05-07/JIR(BNE) M/T BRIS21 (Robin DCJ)
1-5 ORDER
1
10
20
30
40
50
60
...
HIS HONOUR: I direct that the applicant forthwith advise the
respondent at his address for service, recorded in document 8
on the Court file, of that hearing date.
-----
-- 5 of 5 --
Official source: https://www.sclqld.org.au/caselaw/QDC/2009/042