Director of Public Prosecutions v Sinton

The Director of Public Prosecutions appealed to the Court of Criminal Appeal of New South Wales against an order made by a judge of the Supreme Court, which had upheld a permanent stay of proceedings granted by a Local Court Magistrate. The stay concerned charges of negligent driving laid against the respondent, Mr Sinton. The dispute arose from the procedure followed in the committal proceedings for a more serious indictable offence, driving in a manner dangerous occasioning death or grievous bodily harm, and whether this procedure affected the jurisdiction of the trial court to hear the related summary offence.

The central legal issue before the Court of Criminal Appeal was whether the failure to produce a certificate detailing related summary offences and "back-up" charges at the committal stage, as contemplated by Part 10 of the *Criminal Procedure Act 1986* (NSW), deprived the trial court of jurisdiction to determine those related summary offences. A secondary issue concerned whether the lost opportunity and passage of time constituted a fundamental defect going to the root of the trial, justifying the exercise of judicial discretion to grant a permanent stay.

The Court of Criminal Appeal reasoned that the handing up of a certificate under Part 10 of the *Criminal Procedure Act 1986* was a procedural step for the conferral of jurisdiction, not a pre-condition that, if missed, would oust the court's jurisdiction entirely. The object and purpose of the legislation were to facilitate the efficient prosecution of related offences, not to create a jurisdictional bar. The court found that the magistrate had erred in law by concluding that the failure to produce the certificate deprived the court of jurisdiction. Consequently, the permanent stay was improperly granted.

The Court of Criminal Appeal allowed the appeal, set aside the permanent stay order, and remitted the information for negligent driving to the magistrate to hear and determine according to law. The respondent was ordered to pay the appellant's costs of the appeal.