Skip to main content
placeholder image

Broad construction of money laundering provisions doesn’t wash with the High Court

Journal Article


Abstract


  • In Milne v R,

    1

    the High Court considered the construction

    of one of the two key provisions in the

    Commonwealth’s money laundering provisions, “instrument

    of crime”.2 The court unanimously rejected the

    Crown’s contended broad construction and, in so doing,

    took a different view from that of the NSW Court of

    Criminal Appeal.3 The decision would appear to qualify

    the use of money laundering offences in the context of

    tax crime.

Publication Date


  • 2014

Citation


  • M. Leighton-Daly, 'Broad construction of money laundering provisions doesn’t wash with the High Court' (2014) 1 (2) Australian Tax Law Bulletin 45-47.

Number Of Pages


  • 2

Start Page


  • 45

End Page


  • 47

Volume


  • 1

Issue


  • 2

Place Of Publication


  • Australia

Abstract


  • In Milne v R,

    1

    the High Court considered the construction

    of one of the two key provisions in the

    Commonwealth’s money laundering provisions, “instrument

    of crime”.2 The court unanimously rejected the

    Crown’s contended broad construction and, in so doing,

    took a different view from that of the NSW Court of

    Criminal Appeal.3 The decision would appear to qualify

    the use of money laundering offences in the context of

    tax crime.

Publication Date


  • 2014

Citation


  • M. Leighton-Daly, 'Broad construction of money laundering provisions doesn’t wash with the High Court' (2014) 1 (2) Australian Tax Law Bulletin 45-47.

Number Of Pages


  • 2

Start Page


  • 45

End Page


  • 47

Volume


  • 1

Issue


  • 2

Place Of Publication


  • Australia