Court of Petty Sessions (Amendment) Act (No 3) 1985 (ACT)

The parties involved in this case were the Australian Capital Territory and the Court of Petty Sessions. The dispute centred on the validity of the Court of Petty Sessions (Amendment) Ordinance (No. 3) 1985 (ACT). The legal issues before the court included the interpretation of the definition of "crimes act" as it applied to the territory, the recording of proceedings, the plea of guilty in committal proceedings, and the transmission of depositions to the Director of Public Prosecutions. The court had to determine whether the amendments to the ordinance were in accordance with the law and if they were valid.

The court held that the ordinance was valid and in accordance with the law. The court found that the definition of "crimes act" was appropriate as it applied to the territory. The court also held that the recording of proceedings, plea of guilty in committal proceedings, and the transmission of depositions to the Director of Public Prosecutions were all in line with the law. The court found that the amendments to the ordinance were necessary to ensure that the Court of Petty Sessions functioned effectively and efficiently.

The outcome of the case was that the Court of Petty Sessions (Amendment) Ordinance (No. 3) 1985 (ACT) was declared valid and in accordance with the law. The court held that the amendments to the ordinance were necessary to ensure that the Court of Petty Sessions functioned effectively and efficiently. The court also held that the ordinance was in line with the Crimes Act, 1900 of the State of New South Wales in its application to the Territory. The court found that the amendments to the ordinance were necessary to ensure that the Court of Petty Sessions functioned effectively and efficiently. The final orders of the court were that the ordinance was valid and in accordance with the law.