Burow v The Queen

The appeal concerned a decision by a sentencing Magistrate in the Australian Capital Territory who declined to reduce the automatic disqualification period for a driver convicted of driving with a prescribed concentration of alcohol in blood or breath, contrary to s 19 of the *Road Transport (Alcohol and Drugs) Act 1977* (ACT). The appellant, Burow, sought to appeal this decision.

The central legal issues before the Supreme Court of the Australian Capital Territory were whether the Supreme Court had jurisdiction to hear the appeal. This involved interpreting the meaning of an "order to disqualify" under s 208(1)(d) of the *Magistrates Court Act 1930* (ACT) and whether the Magistrate's refusal to reduce the automatic disqualification period constituted such an order. The Court also considered its appellate jurisdiction under s 20 of the *Supreme Court Act 1933* (ACT).

The Court reasoned that the automatic disqualification period imposed by s 19 of the *Road Transport (Alcohol and Drugs) Act 1977* (ACT) was a statutory consequence of the conviction, not an order made by the Magistrate in the exercise of their discretion. Therefore, the Magistrate's refusal to reduce this period did not amount to an "order to disqualify" within the meaning of s 208(1)(d) of the *Magistrates Court Act 1930* (ACT). Consequently, the Supreme Court held that it lacked jurisdiction to entertain the appeal.

The appeal was dismissed.