CONRADIE -v- CONCANNON [2013] WASC 15

Jurisdiction:	SUPREME COURT OF WESTERN AUSTRALIA	Citation No:	[2013] WASC 15
Case No:	SJA:1082/2012	Heard:	20 DECEMBER 2012
Coram:	ALLANSON J	Delivered:	31/01/13
No of pages:	10	Judgment Part:	1 of 1
Result:	Leave to appeal refused Appeal dismissed
Category:	B
PDF Version

Parties:	DANIEL ABRAM CONRADIE TIMOTHY CONCANNON
Catchwords:	Criminal law Application for leave to appeal Assault occasioning bodily harm Turns on own facts
Legislation:	Nil
Case References:	Abalos v Australian Postal Commission [1990] HCA 47; (1990) 171 CLR 167 Beale v Government Insurance Office of NSW (1997) 48 NSWLR 430 Bennett v Carruthers [2010] WASC 5 Bennett v Carruthers [2010] WASCA 131 Manonai v Burns [2011] WASCA 165 Riley v The State of Western Australia [2005] WASCA 190; (2005) 30 WAR 525 Weir v Tomkinson [2001] WASCA 77

JURISDICTION : SUPREME COURT OF WESTERN AUSTRALIA

IN CRIMINAL

CITATION : CONRADIE -v- CONCANNON [2013] WASC 15 CORAM : ALLANSON J HEARD : 20 DECEMBER 2012 DELIVERED : 31 JANUARY 2013 FILE NO/S : SJA 1082 of 2012 BETWEEN : DANIEL ABRAM CONRADIE

Appellant

AND

TIMOTHY CONCANNON

Respondent

ON APPEAL FROM:

Jurisdiction : MAGISTRATES COURT OF WESTERN AUSTRALIA

Coram : MAGISTRATE E C DE VRIES

File No : GN 4708 of 2011

Catchwords:

Criminal law - Application for leave to appeal - Assault occasioning bodily harm - Turns on own facts

Legislation:

Nil

(Page 2)

Result:

Leave to appeal refused

Appeal dismissed

Category: B

Representation:

Counsel:

Appellant : In person

Respondent : Ms G M Cleary

Solicitors:

Appellant : In person

Respondent : Director of Public Prosecutions (WA)

Case(s) referred to in judgment(s):

Abalos v Australian Postal Commission [1990] HCA 47; (1990) 171 CLR 167
Beale v Government Insurance Office of NSW (1997) 48 NSWLR 430
Bennett v Carruthers [2010] WASC 5
Bennett v Carruthers [2010] WASCA 131
Manonai v Burns [2011] WASCA 165
Riley v The State of Western Australia [2005] WASCA 190; (2005) 30 WAR 525
Weir v Tomkinson [2001] WASCA 77

(Page 3)

1 ALLANSON J: On 10 July 2012, Daniel Abram Conradie was convicted after a two day trial of assaulting Hendrik Johannes Greyling and thereby doing him bodily harm. The offence was alleged to have occurred on 10 December 2011 at Three Springs.

2 Mr Conradie seeks leave to appeal on five grounds:

1. The magistrate made an error of law during ruling. He stated that we should have provided alternative possibilities on how Mr Greyling's injuries could have occurred.

2. The magistrate made an error of law or of fact by making a decision without proper evidence. At no stage could the prosecution produce physical forensic or eyewitness proof that a crime had been committed.

3. The magistrate made an error in fact: he was prejudiced towards the evidence of my three sons due to the fact that they were not independent witnesses and their English was not up to standard.

4. The magistrate failed to give proper reasons: during sentencing he did…

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 Conradie v Concannon

Details

AGLC: Conradie v Concannon [2013] WASC 15
Case: [2013] WASC 15
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The Supreme Court of Western Australia considered an appeal by Daniel Abram Conradie against his conviction of assaulting Hendrik Johannes Greyling and thereby doing him bodily harm. The incident occurred on 10 December 2011 at Three Springs. Conradie was convicted after a two-day trial. He sought leave to appeal on five grounds. First, he argued that the magistrate made an error of law during ruling. Second, the magistrate made an error of law or fact by making a decision without proper evidence. Third, the magistrate made an error in fact: he was prejudiced towards the evidence of Conradie's three sons due to the fact that they were not independent witnesses and their English was not up to standard. Fourth, the magistrate failed to give proper reasons: during sentencing he did not make it clear why he was passing his verdict. Fifth, Conradie was in no physical condition to assault someone.

The court found that the first ground could not be sustained as the magistrate did not err in the manner alleged. The court found that the second ground was not reasonably arguable as forensic evidence was unnecessary and the magistrate believed Mr Greyling's evidence was sufficient to satisfy him beyond reasonable doubt. The court found that the third ground had not been established as there was nothing to show that the magistrate was in any way influenced by any difficulties in expression. The court found that the fourth ground had no arguable basis as the magistrate gave reasons orally and set out findings on why he had accepted one set of evidence over conflicting significant evidence. Finally, the court found that the fifth ground was not reasonably arguable as the magistrate did not accept Conradie's evidence generally.

The court concluded that none of the grounds put forward on this appeal had any real prospect of success. Leave to appeal was refused on each ground, and the appeal was dismissed.

Orders