List of subheadings:
Crimes
Act 1914 (Cth)
Scope of s4K(3) and (4)
- Summary offences
- Indictable offences
States and Territories
Related Links:
A court has a power to impose what has become known as a global sentence against a federal offender who has committed multiple or continuing summary offences subject to the conditions set out in s 4K(3) and (4) of the Crimes Act 1914 (Cth).
A 'global sentence' is a single, aggregate sentence. It is also known as a general sentence.
Power to set a global sentence for federal offences may also be granted in specific penalty provisions: see Social Security (Administration) Act 1999 (Cth) s 219; A New Tax System (Family Assistance)(Administration) Act 1999 (Cth) s 179; Shipping Registration Act 1981 (Cth) s 76. Accordingly, imposing one global penalty for all offences is a commonly adopted approach in relation to social security and tax matters.
[Top]
Where a federal offender is convicted of two or more offences against the same federal provision and those charges were joined in the same information, complaint or summons (in accordance with s 4K(3) of the Crimes Act 1914 (Cth)) a court may impose one penalty in respect of both or all of those offences: Crimes Act 1914 (Cth) s 4K(4).
Section 4K(3) provides that the charges must be founded on the same facts, or form, or are part of, a series of offences of the same or a similar character for them to be joined in the same information, complaint or summons.
If a single penalty is set, that penalty shall not exceed the sum of the maximum penalties that could be imposed if a separate penalty were imposed in respect of each offence: Crimes Act 1914 (Cth) s 4K(4).
Note that in contrast to similar sections arising under state legislation, s 4K(3) requires the offences to be against the same provision of a law of the Commonwealth.
[Top]
Section 4K(3) does not state that charges may be joined in the same indictment. Hence, s 4K(3) and (4) are of application only to courts of summary jurisdiction: R v Bibaoui [1997] 2 VR 600; R v Jackson [1998] SASC 6932; Putland v The Queen [2004] HCA 8.
There has been consideration of the application of s 4K in jurisdictions where the term 'information' is also used in relation to initiating proceedings in superior courts (South Australia and the Australian Capital Territory). The application of s 4K(3) and (4) to courts of summary jurisdiction has been upheld. In R v Jackson [1998] SASC 6932, Millhouse J of the Supreme Court of South Australia (Court of Criminal Appeal) said:
It would be a strange state of affairs if the Commonwealth were to single out the ACT and South Australia to enable joinder of Commonwealth offences in superior courts and not in the other States. One of the primary objectives of Commonwealth legislation is to provide consistency between the States. It would be quite illogical for the Commonwealth to allow Commonwealth offences to be treated differently in the ACT and South Australia without an express intention stated. (R v Jackson [1998] SASC 6932, [52]; see also Perry J (Nyland J agreeing) at [132])
[Top]
Superior courts may impose a global sentence for federal offences where they are empowered under state or territory legislation. This is because s 4K of the Crimes Act 1914 (Cth) has been interpreted as not covering the field: Putland v The Queen [2004] HCA 8. See comments by Justice Kirby (in dissent) in Putland v The Queen regarding the implications of this in federal sentencing (ie. uniform sentences [88-90], transparency [116]).
States and Territories with Global Sentencing ProvisionsNorthern Territory - Sentencing Act (NT) s 52(1)
South Australia - Criminal Law (Sentencing) Act 1988 (SA) s18A
Tasmania - Sentencing Act 1997 (Tas) s 11
[Top]
Last updated: 8 February 2008