Bevan Paul Moroney v George John Wojcicka

The Court of Appeal of the Australian Capital Territory heard an appeal by Constable Bevan Paul Moroney against a decision of the Supreme Court of the Australian Capital Territory. The Supreme Court had upheld an appeal against a Magistrate's conviction of George John Wojcicka for failing to wear a seat belt "properly adjusted and fastened" under Rule 264(1) of the Australian Road Rules. The primary judge had quashed the conviction and dismissed the charge. The appellant did not challenge the quashing of the conviction but appealed the dismissal of the charge.

The legal issues before the Court of Appeal were whether the initial appeal to the Supreme Court constituted a "hearing on the merits" for the purposes of the rule against double jeopardy, and consequently, whether the informant's further appeal against the dismissal of the charge was competent. Additionally, the court was required to consider the meaning of "properly adjusted" in the context of Rule 264, specifically whether wearing a lap-sash seat belt only across the lap, without it being across the torso, constituted a properly adjusted seat belt.

The Court of Appeal determined that the appeal to the Supreme Court, which involved the primary judge finding a fundamental error of law by the Magistrate in reversing the onus of proof, was indeed a "hearing on the merits." Therefore, the rule against double jeopardy applied, and the informant's appeal against the acquittal was incompetent. The court affirmed the primary judge's decision to uphold the appeal against the conviction and set aside the conviction, penalty, and orders. However, it set aside the primary judge's order dismissing the charge, effectively leaving the charge dismissed as a consequence of the appeal being upheld.