''R v Tang''
[ .] is decision of the
High Court of Australia
The High Court of Australia is Australia's apex court. It exercises Original jurisdiction, original and appellate jurisdiction on matters specified within Constitution of Australia, Australia's Constitution.
The High Court was established fol ...
.
It is notable as the first
criminal
In ordinary language, a crime is an unlawful act punishable by a state or other authority. The term ''crime'' does not, in modern criminal law, have any simple and universally accepted definition,Farmer, Lindsay: "Crime, definitions of", in Can ...
conviction for a slavery offence in Australia. The case concerned an appeal the State of Victoria against Wei Tang, the operator of a
Melbourne
Melbourne ( ; Boonwurrung/Woiwurrung: ''Narrm'' or ''Naarm'') is the capital and most populous city of the Australian state of Victoria, and the second-most populous city in both Australia and Oceania. Its name generally refers to a met ...
brothel
A brothel, bordello, ranch, or whorehouse is a place where people engage in sexual activity with prostitutes. However, for legal or cultural reasons, establishments often describe themselves as massage parlors, bars, strip clubs, body rub par ...
. The case has been described by commentators as 'the most crucial test of the effectiveness of our criminal laws against … slavery ever to come before an Australian court'.
Facts
Tang was convicted in 2006 of 5 counts of intentionally possessing a slave and 5 counts of intentionally exercising a power of ownership over a slave.
[Outlawed by section 270.3(1)(a) of the Commonwealth Criminal Code] She was sentenced to 10 years’ imprisonment, with a non-parole period of 6 years. The charges related to five women, all of whom were Thai nationals.
The
Victorian Court of Appeal held that the judge's directions to the jury were inadequate,
[.] quashed the convictions and ordered that Tang be retried.
[.]
The prosecution was given special leave to appeal to the High Court. Tang was given special leave to cross appeal on the meaning and constitutional validity of section 270.3(1)(a) of the Criminal Code.
The majority of the High Court,
Gleeson CJ,
Gummow,
Hayne,
Heydon,
Crennan and
Kiefel JJ, upheld the prosecutions appeal, holding that the prosecution did not need to prove that Ms Tang knew or believed that the women were slaves. Tang's appeal on the meaning and validity of the legislation was dismissed.
Kirby J
Michael Donald Kirby (born 18 March 1939) is an Australian jurist and academic who is a former Justice of the High Court of Australia, serving from 1996 to 2009. He has remained active in retirement; in May 2013 he was appointed by the United ...
dissented.
The matter was remitted to the Victorian Court of Appeal to consider Tang's appeal against her sentence.
The Victorian Court of Appeal upheld her appeal against sentence and Tang was re-sentenced to 9 years’ imprisonment, with a non-parole period of 5 years.
[.]
Notes
References
{{Reflist, 30em
High Court of Australia cases
Slavery in Australia
2008 in Australian law
2008 in case law
Australian criminal law