Federal Crime and Related Proceedings

About this NPA

The Federal Crime and Related Proceedings NPA is comprised of the following:

• prosecutions on indictments
• summary prosecutions
• criminal appeals
• bail applications
• various related civil proceedings.

Questions relating to this NPA should be emailed to FederalCourtCrime@fedcourt.gov.au

More about the Court's criminal and related  jurisdiction

On 12 June 2024, following Royal  Assent of the Attorney-General's  Portfolio Miscellaneous Measures Act 2024 (Cth), the  Federal Court of Australia's jurisdiction was expanded to hear and determine a  wider range of summary and indictable offences within the regulatory remit of  the Australian Securities and Investment Commission.

The Federal Court has jurisdiction to hear and determine:

• Prosecutions for indictable offences against provisions  in a number of Commonwealth Acts, including: the Competition and Consumer Act 2010 (Cth), the Australian Securities and Investments Commission Act 2001 (Cth),  the Corporations Act 2001 (Cth), the National Consumer Credit Protection Act 2009 (Cth),  the Superannuation Industry (Supervision) Act 1993 (Cth) and the Criminal Code (Cth).
  In addition, this  Court has jurisdiction to hear summary offences considered related to the  indictable offences being heard in the Court and to hear indictable offences  elected to be dealt with summarily. Indictable offences are tried before a jury and  presided over by a Judge.
• Prosecutions for summary offences against provisions in a  number of Commonwealth Acts, including: the Copyright  Act 1968 (Cth), the Fair Work  Act 2009 (Cth),  the Competition  and Consumer Act 2010 (Cth), the Federal Safety Commissioner Act 2022 (Cth), the Australian Energy Market Act 2004 (Cth) and the Australian Securities and Investments Commission Act 2001 (Cth). Summary offences are tried before a Judge sitting  alone.
• Appeals against indictable judgments, and decisions of summary  offence proceedings, and from judgments relating to bail. Leave to appeal is  required unless the appeal involves a question of law or is about bail.
• Appeals in criminal cases  before the Supreme Court of Norfolk Island.
• Various crime related civil proceedings, including applications under the Proceeds of Crime Act 2002 (Cth) and applications seeking a declaration and punishment for contempt, such as under s 34B of the Australian  Crime Commission Act 2002 (Cth).

Allocation of matters in this NPA

The Court has judges experienced in managing crime-related cases, including criminal appeals, and judicial registrars experienced in the practice and procedure of criminal prosecutions to assist the judges with the case management of such matters.

While any crime-related case is likely to be managed by the Court within this NPA, the Court will ensure that the judge allocated to manage the case has expertise in the underlying area of law the subject of the proceeding - for example, competition and consumer law or intellectual property law.

Judgments

• 15 May 2026: Nicolson v Naizmand (duration of non-publication order) [2026] FCA 635
  PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – application for non-publication order under s 37AF of Federal Court of Australia Act 1976 (Cth) (the Act) – where order is necessary to prevent prejudice to the proper administration of justice – where applicant sought for non-publication order to operate until further order – whether this Court has power to make a final…
  Judge: BROMWICH J
• 22 May 2026: Forrest v Commonwealth Director of Public Prosecutions [2026] FCAFC 69
  CRIMINAL LAW – whether a sentencing judge must state the specific discount given for the utilitarian value of a guilty plea in sentencing for a federal offence – whether general deterrence may be a primary consideration for sentencing insider trading offences – whether the primary judge erred in making a finding based on a Weissensteiner inference …
  Judge: LEE, ABRAHAM AND VANDONGEN JJ
• 19 May 2026: Ardalan v Attorney-General of the Commonwealth of Australia [2026] FCA 615
  COSTS – where application for review of parole refusal decision became moot after new refusal decision made – where merits of proceeding had been fully tried and judgment was reserved – whether applicant should have his costs – where application would almost certainly have succeeded – where both parties acted reasonably – order that respondent pay …
  Judge: RANGIAH J

Speeches & Papers