{"id":"tas:act-1995-043","name":"Criminal Law (Territorial Application) Act 1995","slug":"criminal-law-territorial-application-act-1995","collection":"act","jurisdiction":"tas","status":"in_force","isInForce":true,"actNumber":"43 of 1995","makingDate":null,"administeringDepartment":null,"currentVersion":{"id":106091,"registerId":"tas-act-1995-043-current","compilationNumber":null,"startDate":"2026-04-03","status":"InForce","reasons":null,"registeredAt":null},"sections":[{"sectionNumber":"1","sectionType":"section","heading":"Short title","content":"### 1 Short title\n\n> This Act may be cited as the [Criminal Law (Territorial Application) Act 1995](/view/html/inforce/2026-04-12/act-1995-043) .","sortOrder":0},{"sectionNumber":"2","sectionType":"section","heading":"Commencement","content":"### 2 Commencement\n\n> This Act commences on the day on which it receives the Royal Assent.","sortOrder":1},{"sectionNumber":"3","sectionType":"section","heading":"Interpretation","content":"### 3 Interpretation\n\n> In this Act –\n> \n> > ***crime*** means –\n> > \n> > > > (a) a crime or an offence which is punishable on indictment; and\n> > > \n> > > > (b) a crime under the [Criminal Code](/view/html/inforce/2026-04-12/act-1924-069) which is triable summarily;\n> \n> > ***event*** means any act, omission, occurrence, circumstance or state of affairs (not including intention, knowledge or any other state of mind);\n> \n> > ***necessary territorial nexus*** means the territorial nexus referred to in [section 4](#GS4@EN) ;\n> \n> > ***the State*** includes –\n> > \n> > > > (a) the territorial sea adjacent to the State; and\n> > > \n> > > > (b) the sea on the landward side of the territorial sea that is not within the limits of the State.","sortOrder":2},{"sectionNumber":"4","sectionType":"section","heading":"Territorial application of criminal law","content":"### 4 Territorial application of criminal law\n\n> > (1)  A crime against the law of the State is committed if –\n> > \n> > > > (a) all elements necessary to constitute the crime exist; and\n> > > \n> > > > (b) a territorial nexus exists between the State and at least one element of the crime.\n> \n> > (2)  A territorial nexus exists between the State and an element of a crime if –\n> > \n> > > > (a) the element is or includes an event occurring in the State; or\n> > > \n> > > > (b) the element is or includes an event that occurs outside the State while the person alleged to have committed the crime is in the State.\n> \n> > (3)  There is a presumption that the necessary territorial nexus exists unless rebutted under [section 5](#GS5@EN) or [6](#GS6@EN) .","sortOrder":3},{"sectionNumber":"5","sectionType":"section","heading":"Dispute of necessary territorial nexus in indictable crimes","content":"### 5 Dispute of necessary territorial nexus in indictable crimes\n\n> > (1)  Subject to [subsection (2)](#GS5@Gs2@EN) , a person charged with a crime upon indictment may only dispute the existence of the necessary territorial nexus at the time the person enters a plea on arraignment.\n> \n> > (2)  The judge may allow the person to dispute the existence of the necessary territorial nexus during the trial.\n> \n> > (3)  The judge may require the jury to determine whether the necessary territorial nexus exists even though the issue has not been raised at all in the trial.\n> \n> > (4)  If the existence of the necessary territorial nexus has been disputed on arraignment, the judge may order a jury to be empanelled to determine the issue before the trial.\n> \n> > (5)  A jury empanelled under [subsection (4)](#GS5@Gs4@EN) may be resworn for the trial if it determines that the necessary territorial nexus exists.\n> \n> > (6)  If a jury is satisfied on the balance of probabilities that the necessary territorial nexus does not exist –\n> > \n> > > > (a) the jury, subject to [subsection (7)](#GS5@Gs7@EN) , must return a verdict to that effect; and\n> > > \n> > > > (b) the accused is to be discharged.\n> \n> > (7)  If the jury, irrespective of whether or not there was a territorial nexus, would find a person not guilty (but not on the ground of insanity), it must return a verdict of not guilty.","sortOrder":4},{"sectionNumber":"6","sectionType":"section","heading":"Dispute of necessary territorial nexus in crimes dealt with summarily","content":"### 6 Dispute of necessary territorial nexus in crimes dealt with summarily\n\n> > (1)  If a person charged with a crime which is triable summarily disputes the existence of the necessary territorial nexus, the court is to proceed with the trial in the usual way.\n> \n> > (2)  If raised before the trial, the issue of whether the necessary territorial nexus exists must be reserved for consideration at the trial.\n> \n> > (3)  If the court is satisfied on the balance of probabilities that the necessary territorial nexus does not exist –\n> > \n> > > > (a) the court, subject to [subsection (4)](#GS6@Gs4@EN) , must return a finding to that effect; and\n> > > \n> > > > (b) the complaint is to be dismissed.\n> \n> > (4)  If the court, irrespective of whether or not there was a territorial nexus, would find the person not guilty of the crime (but not on the ground of insanity), it must return a finding of not guilty.","sortOrder":5},{"sectionNumber":"7","sectionType":"section","heading":"Exercise of certain powers and authority","content":"### 7 Exercise of certain powers and authority\n\n> A power or authority exercisable on belief on reasonable grounds that a crime against the law of the State has been committed may be exercised in the State if the person in whom the power or authority is vested suspects on reasonable grounds that the elements necessary to constitute the crime exist (whether or not that person suspects or has any ground to suspect that the territorial nexus with the State exists).","sortOrder":6},{"sectionNumber":"8","sectionType":"section","heading":"Charged with several crimes","content":"### 8 Charged with several crimes\n\n> A person charged with a crime who could be found guilty of that crime or some other crime is taken to be charged with each crime.","sortOrder":7},{"sectionNumber":"9","sectionType":"section","heading":"Application of Act","content":"### 9 Application of Act\n\n> > (1)  The provisions of this Act apply to crimes committed before or after its commencement.\n> \n> > (2)  The provisions of this Act do not apply to a crime if –\n> > \n> > > > (a) the law under which the crime is created explicitly or impliedly makes the place of commission an element of the crime; or\n> > > \n> > > > (b) the law under which the crime is created is a law of extraterritorial operation which explicitly or impliedly excludes the requirement for a territorial nexus between the State and an element of the crime; or\n> > > \n> > > > (c) a charge has been laid before the commencement of this Act.\n> \n> > (3)  The provisions of this Act are in addition to, and do not derogate from, any other basis on which the court may exercise criminal jurisdiction.","sortOrder":8},{"sectionNumber":"10.","sectionType":"section","heading":null,"content":"### 10.\n\n*Criminal Code*","sortOrder":9}],"analysis":{"flash_summary_failed":{"failed":true,"reason":"A positive credit balance is required for all requests, including BYOK, so fallback providers remain available. Add credits at https://vercel.com/d?to=%2F%5Bteam%5D%2F%7E%2Fai%3Fmodal%3Dtop-up to continue.","source":"analysis-cron"},"summary":{"complexity_score":4,"scope_assessment":{"changed":false,"description":"Based on the available text, the Act appears to have maintained its original narrow focus on clarifying the territorial reach of Tasmanian criminal law. No amendments visible in the provided content suggest any significant expansion or contraction of scope since its commencement in 1997."},"complexity_factors":["Deals with jurisdictional concepts (territorial application) that are inherently abstract and technical","Requires understanding of how multiple state/territory legal systems interact with each other and Commonwealth law","Limited legislative text was provided, making full assessment difficult — the Act may contain more technical provisions not shown","Cross-border criminal law scenarios can involve complex factual and legal questions about where key elements of an offence occurred","Has remained largely unchanged since 1997, suggesting narrow and stable scope rather than layered complexity from repeated amendments"],"plain_english_summary":"This Act clarifies when Tasmania’s criminal law applies to offences with cross-border elements. It says Tasmania can prosecute if a substantial part of the conduct or its effects occurred in Tasmania, so wrongdoing planned, initiated, or causing harm across borders can still be tried here. It matters to accused persons, victims, prosecutors and courts handling interstate or online crimes."},"flash_summary":{"complexity_score":4,"scope_assessment":{"changed":false,"description":"The text itself defines territorial scope and states it applies to crimes before or after commencement subject to specific exceptions (s9). No material in the provided text indicates a change from an earlier or original statutory scope; whether scope has altered from prior law cannot be determined from this instrument alone."},"complexity_factors":["Statutory presumption that the necessary territorial nexus exists (s4(3)) which shifts litigation strategy and evidential framing for prosecution and defence.","Different procedural regimes for indictable versus summary offences (challenging nexus at arraignment and pre‑trial jury empanelling in s5; reserved issues and court findings in s6).","Judicial discretions to allow late challenges, empanel a jury solely to decide nexus, and reswear juries for trial (s5(2)–(5), s5(3)), creating possible pre‑trial complexity.","Standard of proof for absence of nexus is balance of probabilities when court or jury determines it (s5(6), s6(3)), producing mixed criminal/civil burdens.","Definitional issues that affect application: 'event' excludes mental states (s3), and 'the State' includes territorial sea and adjacent sea (s3), requiring spatial interpretation.","Interaction and exceptions with other laws: applies to past offences (s9(1)) but excludes offences where place is an element, extraterritorial statutes that exclude nexus, or charges laid before commencement (s9(2)).","Provision allowing exercise of powers when officer suspects elements exist even if they do not suspect territorial nexus (s7), which affects operational policing discretion and potential challenge points.","Conciseness of the Act reduces drafting complexity but increases reliance on judicial interpretation across many factual scenarios."],"plain_english_summary":"This Act sets when a State’s criminal law applies by requiring a territorial nexus between the State and at least one element of the offence (s4). It creates a legal presumption that the nexus exists (s4(3)) but allows an accused to challenge that presumption; procedures differ for indictable offences (time-limited challenge at arraignment, judge and jury roles — s5) and summary matters (court-determined, s6). The rules affect defendants, prosecutors and courts because they determine where and when criminal liability can be tried."},"issue_detection":{"absurdities":[],"contradictions":[]},"kimi_summary":{"content_quality":"ok","complexity_score":4,"scope_assessment":{"changed":false,"description":"The legislation appears to remain focused on its original purpose of clarifying and codifying the territorial limits of Tasmania's criminal jurisdiction. The scope has not expanded beyond establishing when Tasmanian courts can exercise criminal jurisdiction over conduct with cross-border elements."},"complexity_factors":["4 defined terms in the interpretation section, though 'crime' has nested sub-definitions","Conditional logic in section 4 establishing two alternative tests for territorial nexus","Separate procedural tracks for indictable crimes (section 5) and summary crimes (section 6) with different timing rules and decision-makers (jury vs magistrate)","Nested exceptions in section 9(2) excluding three categories of existing laws from the Act's operation","Cross-references between sections 4, 5, and 6 regarding the 'necessary territorial nexus'","Interaction with common law preserved by section 9(3) creating parallel jurisdictional bases"],"plain_english_summary":"This law sets the rules for when Tasmania can prosecute someone for a crime based on where the crime happened.\n\n**What it does:**\n- **Establishes the 'territorial nexus' test**: For Tasmania to prosecute someone, there must be a connection (called a 'territorial nexus') between Tasmania and at least one part of the crime. This connection exists if either:\n  - Something happened in Tasmania (like the crime itself, or part of it); OR\n  - The accused person was in Tasmania when something related to the crime happened elsewhere.\n\n- **Covers serious and minor crimes**: It applies to serious crimes tried by jury ('indictable' offences) and minor crimes handled by a magistrate alone ('summary' offences).\n\n- **Sets up a presumption**: The law assumes the territorial connection exists unless the accused person challenges it.\n\n- **Explains how to challenge it**: \n  - For serious crimes: The accused must generally raise the issue when they enter their plea, though a judge can allow it later or even ask the jury to decide it even if nobody raised it.\n  - For minor crimes: The issue is decided at trial by the magistrate.\n  - If the court finds no territorial connection exists, the case is dismissed.\n\n- **Protects police powers**: Police can still exercise their powers (like arresting someone) if they reasonably suspect a crime occurred, even if they don't know whether the territorial connection exists.\n\n- **Defines 'the State' broadly**: Includes Tasmania's land, its coastal waters (territorial sea), and internal waters.\n\n**Who it affects:**\n- Anyone accused of a crime in Tasmania where some or all of the alleged criminal conduct happened outside the state.\n- Police and prosecutors deciding whether they can lay charges.\n- Courts determining if they have jurisdiction to hear a case.\n\n**Why it matters:**\nBefore this law, the rules about when Tasmania could prosecute crimes with overseas or interstate elements were unclear and based on old common law principles. This Act modernises and clarifies the rules, making it easier to prosecute crimes like fraud, drug trafficking, or assaults where some elements cross borders, while protecting people from being prosecuted when there's no real connection to Tasmania."}},"importantCases":[],"_links":{"self":"/api/acts/criminal-law-territorial-application-act-1995","history":"/api/acts/criminal-law-territorial-application-act-1995/history","analysis":"/api/acts/criminal-law-territorial-application-act-1995/analysis","conflicts":"/api/acts/criminal-law-territorial-application-act-1995/conflicts","importantCases":"/api/acts/criminal-law-territorial-application-act-1995/important-cases","documents":"/api/acts/criminal-law-territorial-application-act-1995/documents"}}