MOK v Director of Public Prosecutions (NSW)

HIGH COURT OF AUSTRALIAFRENCH CJ,KIEFEL, BELL, KEANE AND GORDON JJYAU MING MATTHEW MOK  APPELLANTANDDIRECTOR OF PUBLIC PROSECUTIONS (NSW)                  RESPONDENTMok v Director of Public Prosecutions (NSW)[2016] HCA 136 April 2016S246/2015ORDERAppeal dismissed with costs.On appeal from the Supreme Court of New South WalesRepresentationG R James QC with P D Lange for the appellant (instructed by Murphy's Lawyers)N J Adams SC with B K Baker for the respondent (instructed by Solicitor for Public Prosections (NSW))Notice:  This copy of the Court's Reasons for Judgment is subject to formal revision prior to publication in the Commonwealth Law Reports.CATCHWORDSMok v Director of Public Prosecutions (NSW)Federal jurisdiction – Application of State laws – Service and Execution of Process Act 1992 (Cth) ("SEPA"), s 89(4) – Where appellant arrested in Victoria pursuant to warrant issued in New South Wales – Where order made under s 83(8)(b) of SEPA to return appellant in custody to New South Wales – Where appellant charged with attempting to escape lawful custody under s 310D of Crimes Act 1900 (NSW) ("Crimes Act") – Whether s 89(4) of SEPA applied s 310D of Crimes Act as surrogate federal law – Whether content of applied State law altered – Whether prosecution required to prove all elements of offence under State law.Words and phrases – "competent authority", "correctional centre", "court", "escape lawful custody", "inmate", "law of a State", "surrogate federal law". Constitution, ss 51(xxiv), 52(i).Commonwealth Places (Application of Laws) Act 1970 (Cth), s 4.Judiciary Act 1903 (Cth), ss 68, 79.Service and Execution of Process Act 1992...