DPP v Pinn - [2015] NSWSC 1684

Supreme Court

New South Wales

Case Name:	DPP v Pinn
Medium Neutral Citation:	[2015] NSWSC 1684
Hearing Date(s):	9 November 2015
Decision Date:	12 November 2015
Jurisdiction:	Common Law
Before:	Adamson J
Decision:	(1) Appeal allowed. (2) Set aside the order of Magistrate Huber made on 8 May 2015 at the Waverley Local Court dismissing proceedings against the defendant for the offences of knowingly contravene prohibition or restriction in an apprehended violence order (eight counts). (3) Remit the matter to the Local Court to be dealt with according to law. (4) Order the defendant to pay the plaintiff’s costs of the proceedings. (5) Decline the defendant’s application for a certificate under s 6 of the Suitor’s Fund Act 1951 (NSW).
Catchwords:	CRIMINAL LAW – appeal from Local Court against decision to dismiss charges against defendant for contravening interim apprehended violence order – appeal upheld - matter remitted to Local Court EVIDENCE – admissibility – whether Magistrate erred in refusing to examine documents in order to rule on admissibility - whether Magistrate erred in refusing to admit documents on the basis of form EVIDENCE – admissibility – business records - matters relevant to establishing provenance of documents – National Australia Bank v Rusu [1999] NSWSC 539; 47 NSWLR 309 considered EVIDENCE – relevance – whether Magistrate erred in failing to draw inferences as to relevance as permitted by s 58 of the Evidence Act 1995 (NSW) COSTS – whether certificate under Suitors’ Fund Act 1951 (NSW) appropriate – conduct of legal representatives in court below relevant to exercise of discretion – application for certificate refused
Legislation Cited:	Crimes Act 1900 (NSW), ss 61, 195 Crimes (Appeal and Review) Act 2001 (NSW), s 56 Crimes (Domestic and Personal Violence) Act 2007 (NSW), ss 3, 14, 22, 76, 77 Evidence Act 1995 (NSW), ss, 58, 60, 69, 144, 150, 170, 171, 172, 178, 183 Suitors’ Fund Act 1951 (NSW), s 6
Cases Cited:	Australian Competition and Consumer Commission v Air New Zealand (No. 1) (2012) 207 FCR 448 Australian Securities and Investments Commission v Rich [2005] NSWSC 417 Mir Bros Developments Pty Ltd v Atlantic Constructions Pty Ltd (1985) 1 NSWLR 491 National Australia Bank v Rusu [1999] NSWSC 539; 47 NSWLR 309
Category:	Principal judgment
Parties:	Director of Public Prosecutions (Plaintiff) Francis Charles Pinn (Defendant)
Representation:	Counsel: A Mitchelmore (Plaintiff) CA Webster SC (Defendant) Solicitors: C Hyland, Solicitor for Public Prosecutions (Plaintiff) Aboriginal Legal Service (NSW/ACT) Ltd (Defendant)
File Number(s):	2015/252672
Decision under appeal:
Court or Tribunal:	Local Court of New South Wales
Jurisdiction:	Criminal
Date of Decision:	8 May 2015
Before:	Huber LCM

JUDGMENT

Introduction

By summons filed on 28 August 2015 the plaintiff appeals from a decision of the Local Court on 8 May 2015 to dismiss eight charges of knowingly contravene a restriction specified in an Apprehended Violence Order (AVO) contrary to s 14(1) of the Crimes (Domestic and Personal Violence) Act 2007 (NSW) (the Act). The plaintiff’s appeal is brought pursuant to s 56(1)(a) of the

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 DPP v Pinn

Details

AGLC: DPP v Pinn [2015] NSWSC 1684
Case: [2015] NSWSC 1684
Decision Date: 12 November 2015

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The case of the Director of Public Prosecutions versus Pinn was heard by the Local Court, which dismissed charges against the defendant for breaching an interim apprehended violence order. The Director of Public Prosecutions appealed the decision to the Supreme Court, arguing that the Local Court's dismissal was in error. The Supreme Court was tasked with determining whether the Local Court correctly dismissed the charges and whether it erred in its handling of evidence and relevance.

The primary legal issues before the court were whether the Local Court erred in not examining documents to determine their admissibility and whether it was correct to refuse admission based on the form of the documents. Additionally, the court had to consider whether the Local Court appropriately exercised its discretion under section 58 of the Evidence Act 1995 (NSW) to draw inferences about the relevance of evidence. The admissibility of business records, particularly regarding the provenance of documents, was also scrutinized in light of the principles from National Australia Bank v Rusu [1999] NSWSC 539; 47 NSWLR 309.

The Supreme Court found that the Local Court had indeed erred in its handling of the evidence. It held that the Magistrate should have examined the documents to assess their admissibility rather than refusing them based solely on form. Furthermore, the court ruled that the Local Court failed to adequately exercise its discretion to infer the relevance of evidence as permitted by section 58 of the Evidence Act. Consequently, the Supreme Court allowed the appeal, remitted the matter to the Local Court for further consideration, and refused an application for a certificate under the Suitors’ Fund Act 1951 (NSW) due to the conduct of legal representatives in the court below.

Orders