1For example, the Crimes at Sea Act 1998.

1 For example, the Crimes at Sea Act 1998. 5G—Territorial requirements for commission of offence against a law of this State (1) An offence against a law of this State is committed if— (a) all elements necessary to constitute the offence (disregarding territorial considerations) exist; and (b) the necessary territorial nexus exists. (2) The necessary territorial nexus exists if— (a) a relevant act occurred wholly or partly in this State; or (b) it is not possible to establish whether any of the relevant acts giving rise to the alleged offence occurred within or outside this State but the alleged offence caused harm or a threat of harm in this State; or (c) although no relevant act occurred in this State— (i) the alleged offence caused harm or a threat of harm in this State and the relevant acts that gave rise to the alleged offence also gave rise to an offence against the law of a jurisdiction in which the relevant acts, or at least one of them, occurred; or (ii) the alleged offence caused harm or a threat of harm in this State and the harm, or the threat, is sufficiently serious to justify the imposition of a criminal penalty under the law of this State; or (iii) the relevant acts that gave rise to the alleged offence also gave rise to an offence against the law of a jurisdiction in which the relevant acts, or at least one of them, occurred and the alleged offender was in this State when the relevant acts, or at least one of them, occurred; or (d) the alleged offence is a conspiracy to commit, an attempt to commit, or in some other way preparatory to the commission of another offence for which the necessary territorial nexus would exist under one or more of the above paragraphs if it (the other offence) were committed as contemplated. 5H—Procedural provisions (1) In proceedings for an offence against a law of the State, the existence of the necessary territorial nexus will be presumed and the presumption is conclusive unless rebutted under subsection (2). (2) If a person charged with an offence disputes the existence of the necessary territorial nexus, the court will proceed with the trial of the offence in the usual way and if at the conclusion of the trial, the court is satisfied, on the balance of probabilities, that the necessary territorial nexus does not exist, it must, subject to subsection (3), make a finding to that effect and the charge will be dismissed. (3) If the court would, disregarding territorial considerations— (a) find the person not guilty of the offence—the court must record a finding of not guilty; or (b) find that the conduct has been proved but the person is not criminally responsible due to mental incompetence—the court must record a finding of conduct proved but not criminally responsible due to mental incompetence. (4) The issue of whether the necessary territorial nexus exists must, if raised before the trial, be reserved for consideration at the trial. (5) A power or authority exercisable on reasonable suspicion that an offence 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 offence exist (whether or not that person suspects or has any ground to suspect that the necessary territorial nexus exists). 5I—Double criminality (1) If— (a) an offence against the law of another State (the external offence) is committed wholly or partly in this State; and (b) a corresponding offence (the local offence) exists under the law of this State, an offence (an auxiliary offence) arises under the law of this State. (2) The maximum penalty for an auxiliary offence is the maximum penalty for the external offence or the maximum penalty for the local offence (whichever is the lesser). (3) If a person is charged with an offence (but not specifically an auxiliary offence) and the court finds that the defendant has not committed the offence as charged but has committed the relevant auxiliary offence, the court may make or return a finding that the defendant is guilty of the auxiliary offence.