FREEMAN v Police

The appellant appealed against his conviction for three driving offences allegedly committed on Light Square, Adelaide. The offences were illegal use of a motor vehicle, driving while under the influence of intoxicating liquor, and driving without a licence. The appeal was based on the premise that the court was provided with an incorrect legislative definition of "road" during the trial, which led to an erroneous decision. The appellant argued that the magistrate erred in considering the wrong definition of "road" and that the magistrate's reasons were inadequate. Additionally, the appellant contended that the magistrate's reasons were inadequate and that the interest of justice required the matter to be remitted for re-trial if the appeal was successful.

The court was required to determine whether the magistrate erred in considering the wrong definition of "road" and whether the magistrate's reasons were adequate. The court also had to decide whether the appellant "drove" the vehicle and whether the matter should be remitted for re-trial if the appeal was successful. Furthermore, the court had to consider whether the appeal against the conviction on Count 1 should be dismissed and whether the appeals against the convictions on Counts 2 and 3 should be allowed.

The court found that the magistrate was correct in finding that the appellant "drove" the motor vehicle. The court held that the magistrate erred in considering the wrong definition of "road" and that the verdicts on Counts 2 and 3 should be set aside. The court also found that the magistrate's reasons were adequate. The court concluded that the interest of justice required the matter to be remitted for re-trial of Counts 2 and 3. The appeal against the verdict of guilty on Count 1 was dismissed, and the appeals against the convictions on Counts 2 and 3 were allowed. The verdicts on those counts were set aside and the matter was to be remitted to another magistrate for a re-trial of those two charges.