Penny v. Penny1
| Author | J. L. Merity |
| DOI | 10.1177/0067205X6600200110 |
| Published date | 01 March 1966 |
| Date | 01 March 1966 |
| Subject Matter | Case Notes |
JUNE
1966]
Case
Notes 135
the
Australian Security Intelligence Organization
and
the Attorney-
General,
'information'
as used
in
section 5(3) meant something more
than
'chit
chat
or
idle social
talk'.
Alternatively, he submitted
that
,arguments similar
to
those raised in relation
to
ground (b) applied
and
before something could be
'information'
it
had
to
be something
not
known by the recipient.
Joske J. intimated
that
he would
not
entertain grounds (b) and (c)
of
the
above submission. However
in
relation
to
ground (a) he ruled
that
mens
rea
was
an
essential element
of
the offence charged. The
jury
was then recalled and after refreshing the jury's recollection
of
the
charges against Webbie, Joske J.
proceeded-
Now, the essence
of
that
offence
...
is
that
he must have
...
aguilty
mind,
and
that
involves, in the case
of
this particular offence ...
that
he should have knowingly communicated . . . knowingly
in
the sense
that
he knew
that
what he was communicating
had
passed
over the telephone system
and
that
there
had
been
an
interception
of
it. Now, it
is
not
enough
...
simply to say,
'This
communi-
cation
had
in fact passed over the telephone system
and
he
had
in
fact communicated
it
to
her.'
There being no evidence
that
Webbie actually knew
that
the tape
recording was atape recording
of
something
that
had
passed over the
telephone system Joske J. directed the jury
to
return averdict
of
not
guilty.
A.
CIRULIS*
PENNY
v.
PENNy1
Matrimonial Causes-Maintenance-Order
to
Secure-Nature
and effect
-Whether
personal covenant security-Power
of
Court
to
vary
Matrimonial Causes Act 1959, section
87
(1.) (j), (1.), (2.).
The applicant applied
to
the
court
to
have previous orders
to
secure
maintenance made against him by the court discharged
or
varied.
The applicant's first marriage was dissolved in 1952.
In
1957 the
applicant's second marriage was the subject
of
adecree
of
judicial
separation.
In
1957 the Registrar made
an
order against the applicant for the
maintenance
of
his first wife. By this order the applicant was ordered
to secure
to
this wife for her life
an
annual sum by adeed containing a
personal covenant. The applicant executed adeed
in
compliance with
this order.
On
the same day
an
order was made by the Registrar for
the maintenance
of
his second wife.
By
this order the applicant was
to
pay
to
this wife for her life
an
annual sum also. This sum was
to
be
*LL.B.
(A.N.U.);
Barrister and Solicitor
of
the Supreme Court
of
Victoria.
1(1965) 6F.L.R. 45,
81
W.N. (N.S.W.) 531, Supreme Court
of
N.S.W. ;Selby J.
To continue reading
Request your trial