Legal Research
Cases
Ejueyitsi v Maloney

Ejueyitsi v Maloney

Case [2006] WASC 146 26 July 2006

Criminal Liability

Appeal

Assessment of Credibility

Limitation Periods

Judicial Review

Miscarriage of Justice

Criminal Law

No judgment structure available for this case.

Type to search within this case.

EJUEYITSI -v- MALONEY [2006] WASC 146

Jurisdiction:	SUPREME COURT OF WESTERN AUSTRALIA	Citation No:	[2006] WASC 146
Case No:	SJA:1010/2005	Heard:	9 JUNE 2006
Coram:	HASLUCK J	Delivered:	26/07/06
No of pages:	25	Judgment Part:	1 of 1
Result:	Application for leave to appeal dismissed Appeal dismissed
Category:	B
PDF Version

Parties:	VINCENT BABATUNDE EJUEYITSI JOHN MALONEY
Catchwords:	Criminal law Charge of false statement pursuant to Migration Act 1958 (Cth) Whether statement concerning residency was false or misleading in a material particular Whether prosecution established beyond reasonable doubt that statement was false Whether Magistrate erred in his appraisal of evidence Assessment of credibility of witnesses Delay in prosecuting appeal Whether extension of time should be allowed Comparison of earlier appellate legislation at time of conviction to current requirements Leave to appeal refused Turns on own facts
Legislation:	Courts Legislation Amendment and Repeal Act 2004 (WA), s 23 Criminal Appeals Act 2004 (WA), s 9, s 10 Criminal Procedure (Summary) Act 1902 (WA), s 23 Criminal Procedure and Appeals (Consequential and Other Provisions) Act 2004 (WA), s 3, s 4 Interpretation Act 1984 (WA), s 36, s 37 Justices Act 1902 (WA), s 184, s 187(1), s 189, s 196, s 199, s 206C Migration Act 1958 (Cth) Rules of the Supreme Court 1971 (WA), O 65A r 2(b)
Case References:	Atholwood v The Queen (2000) 110 A Crim R 417 Devries v Australian National Railways Commission (1993) 177 CLR 472 Gallo v Dawson (1990) 93 ALR 479 Garrett v Nicholson (1999) 21 WAR 226 Hajinoor v Dench [2005] WASC 274 Harling v Hall (1997) 94 A Crim R 437 King v City of Fremantle [2004] WASCA 212 Lancaster v The Queen [1989] WAR 83 Lawless v Turner [2005] WASC 254 M v The Queen (1994) 181 CLR 487 Maxwell v Murphy (1957) 96 CLR 261 Mount Lawley Pty Ltd v Western Australian Planning Commission [2004] WASCA 149; (2004) 29 WAR 273 Rodway v The Queen (1990) 169 CLR 515 Skerritt v O'Keefe [1999] WASCA 183 Verhoeven v Ninyette (1998) 101 A Crim R 24 Vrisakis v Australian Securities Commission (1993) 9 WAR 395 Nil

JURISDICTION : SUPREME COURT OF WESTERN AUSTRALIA

IN CIVIL

CITATION : EJUEYITSI -v- MALONEY [2006] WASC 146 CORAM : HASLUCK J HEARD : 9 JUNE 2006 DELIVERED : 26 JULY 2006 FILE NO/S : SJA 1010 of 2005 BETWEEN : VINCENT BABATUNDE EJUEYITSI

Applicant

AND

JOHN MALONEY

Respondent

ON APPEAL FROM:

Jurisdiction : COURT OF PETTY SESSIONS

Coram : MR R B LAWRENCE SM

File No : PE 48305 of 2000

Catchwords:

Criminal law - Charge of false statement pursuant to Migration Act 1958 (Cth) - Whether statement concerning residency was false or misleading in a material particular - Whether prosecution established beyond reasonable doubt that statement was false - Whether Magistrate erred in his appraisal of evidence - Assessment of credibility of witnesses - Delay in prosecuting appeal - Whether extension of time should be allowed - Comparison of earlier appellate legislation at time…

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 Ejueyitsi v Maloney

Details

AGLC: Ejueyitsi v Maloney [2006] WASC 146
Case: [2006] WASC 146
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The applicant, Vincent Babatunde Ejueyitsi, sought leave to appeal against a conviction recorded against him in the Court of Petty Sessions at Perth on charges arising out of an infringement of the Migration Act 1958 (Cth). The court had to decide whether to grant leave to appeal and, if so, whether the appeal should be allowed. The applicant argued that the learned Magistrate erred in his appraisal of the evidence presented in support of the prosecution case. The court found that the learned Magistrate had correctly assessed the credibility of the witnesses and the evidence, and had given adequate reasons for his decision. The court held that the applicant had not demonstrated that there had been a miscarriage of justice or that there were exceptional circumstances to justify an extension of time. The application for an extension of time to appeal was refused, and the application for leave to appeal was dismissed.

Orders