Bilal Masri v The Queen - [2021] NSWDC 305

District Court

New South Wales

Amendment notes

Medium Neutral Citation: Bilal Masri v R [2021] NSWDC 305
Hearing dates: 24 June 2021
Date of orders: 25 June 2021
Decision date: 25 June 2021
Jurisdiction: Criminal
Before: Hatzistergos AM DCJ
Decision:
Appeal allowed
Conviction and sentence set aside
Judgment of acquittal entered

Catchwords:
CONVICTION APPEAL –– Driving whilst suspended -Defence of honest and reasonable mistake raised but did not need to be determined - notice of suspension invalid - Insufficient notice period by one day due to the intervening weekend following posting - Failure of notice to comply with mandatory 28 day notice period - Crown unable to establish that the Appellant’s licence was suspended when driving.

Legislation Cited:
Crimes (Appeal and Review) Act 2001 (NSW), s 18
Road Transport Act 2013 (NSW), ss 39, 40, 54, 257
Interpretation Act 1987 (NSW), s 9
Road Transport (Driver Licensing) Regulation 2017 (NSW), clause 69
Road Transport (General) Regulation 2013 (NSW), clause 6

Category: Principal judgment
Parties: Bilal Masri (Appellant)
Regina (Crown)
Representation:
Appearances:
Mr E Khouzame Solicitor (Appellant)
Ms M Welch Solicitor (Respondent)
Solicitors:
Senses Legal (Appellant)
The Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions (Respondent)

File Number(s): 2020/00101124001
Publication restriction: Nil
Decision under appeal

Court or tribunal:

Local Court of NSW

Jurisdiction:

Criminal

Date of Decision:

13 April 2021

Before:

M Price ALCM

File Number(s):

777172135

Judgment

The Appellant appeals pursuant to s 18(1) of the Crimes (Appeal and Review) Act 2001 (NSW) in respect of his conviction for an offence that:

At 12.50am on 29 March 2020 at Greenacre he did drive on a road a motor vehicle of a class to which he was suspended.

This is an offence contrary to s 54(3) of the Road Transport Act 2013 (NSW) (the 2013 Act).
The matter proceeded by way of the Crown tendering the transcript of evidence and exhibits before the Local Court.
The essential matters were not in dispute and are as follows:

The Appellant was the driver of a white Audi S4 motor vehicle on 29 March 2020 at 12.50am. At that time the Appellant was stopped by police who were conducting stationary speed enforcement duties for northbound traffic on Roberts Road between the intersections of Rebecca Street and Northcote Road.

Senior Constable Aman Sareen (SC Sareen) approached the Appellant in relation to the speed of his travel and asked to produce his licence. The Appellant did so. After completing a traffic penalty notice for exceeding the speed limit, SC Sareen conducted checks on the Appellant’s licence which revealed a demerit point suspension from 17 March 2020 to 16 June 2020. The suspension related to four offences committed on 20 December 2019 resulting in a loss of 18 demerit points despite the Appellant having a maximum of 7. SC Sareen informed the Appellant of this driving history adding “So, based on that alone, your licence is already suspended. Is there any reason why you are driving whilst suspended? The Appellant responded “Can I…

Grounds of appeal

[14] The appellant contends that the primary judge erred in finding that the respondent had discharged the onus of establishing the matters required under the relevant provision.

[15] It was submitted that his Honour failed to give adequate weight to the evidence of the second witness, and that the findings of fact were not reasonably open on the material before the Court.

[16] The respondent, for its part, submits that no error is disclosed, and that the conclusions reached were well within the range of outcomes available to the primary judge.

Consideration

[17] It is convenient to deal first with the question of construction, as the resolution of that issue informs the remaining grounds advanced by the appellant.

[18] For the reasons that follow, we are of the view that the appeal should be allowed in part and the matter remitted for further determination.

Continue reading Bilal Masri v The Queen

Details

AGLC: Bilal Masri v The Queen [2021] NSWDC 305
Case: [2021] NSWDC 305
Decision Date: 25 June 2021

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In the case of Bilal Masri v The Queen, the appellant, Bilal Masri, contested his conviction for driving while his licence was suspended. The appeal was heard in the High Court of Australia, which examined the validity of the suspension notice and the sufficiency of the notice period provided. The primary legal issues centered on whether the notice of suspension was valid and if the notice period complied with statutory requirements. The court had to determine if the notice was issued correctly and if the mandatory 28-day notice period was adhered to, particularly considering the intervening weekend that followed the posting of the notice. The appellant argued that the notice of suspension was invalid due to an insufficient notice period by one day, which arose because of the weekend that followed the posting of the notice. The Crown contended that the appellant's licence was indeed suspended at the time of the driving offence.

The court found that the notice of suspension was invalid due to the failure to provide a sufficient notice period. The notice did not comply with the mandatory 28-day notice period because of the intervening weekend, thus rendering the suspension notice ineffective. As a result, the Crown could not establish that the appellant’s licence was suspended when he drove. The court held that the appellant’s conviction could not stand since the Crown had failed to prove the suspension of the licence at the relevant time. The court concluded that the appeal was well-founded, leading to the setting aside of the conviction and sentence, and the entry of a judgment of acquittal. The appeal was allowed, and the conviction and sentence were set aside, with a judgment of acquittal entered.

Orders

Orders of the court

Appeal allowed

Conviction and sentence set aside

Judgment of acquittal entered

Background

Background to the litigation

Full text does not contain this section.

Evidence

Evidence Before The Court

Full text does not contain this section.

Decision

Reasons for decision

Full text does not contain this section.

Ratio Decidendi

Legal Principle Established

Full text does not contain this section.

Medium Neutral Citation:	Bilal Masri v R [2021] NSWDC 305
Hearing dates:	24 June 2021
Date of orders:	25 June 2021
Decision date:	25 June 2021
Jurisdiction:	Criminal
Before:	Hatzistergos AM DCJ
Decision:	Appeal allowed Conviction and sentence set aside Judgment of acquittal entered
Catchwords:	CONVICTION APPEAL –– Driving whilst suspended -Defence of honest and reasonable mistake raised but did not need to be determined - notice of suspension invalid - Insufficient notice period by one day due to the intervening weekend following posting - Failure of notice to comply with mandatory 28 day notice period - Crown unable to establish that the Appellant’s licence was suspended when driving.
Legislation Cited:	Crimes (Appeal and Review) Act 2001 (NSW), s 18 Road Transport Act 2013 (NSW), ss 39, 40, 54, 257 Interpretation Act 1987 (NSW), s 9 Road Transport (Driver Licensing) Regulation 2017 (NSW), clause 69 Road Transport (General) Regulation 2013 (NSW), clause 6
Category:	Principal judgment
Parties:	Bilal Masri (Appellant) Regina (Crown)
Representation:	Appearances: Mr E Khouzame Solicitor (Appellant) Ms M Welch Solicitor (Respondent) Solicitors: Senses Legal (Appellant) The Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions (Respondent)
File Number(s):	2020/00101124001
Publication restriction:	Nil
Decision under appeal	Court or tribunal: Local Court of NSW Jurisdiction: Criminal Date of Decision: 13 April 2021 Before: M Price ALCM File Number(s): 777172135