Holder v Geerdink

[2021] ACTSC 173

SUPREME COURT OF THE AUSTRALIAN CAPITAL TERRITORY

Case Title:	Holder v Geerdink
Citation:	[2021] ACTSC 173
Hearing Date:	7 July 2021
DecisionDate:	7 July 2021
Before:	Burns ACJ
Decision:	See [10]
Catchwords:	APPEAL – MAGISTRATES COURT APPEAL – Application to dismiss appeal for want of prosecution – where no appearance by appellant – where appellant notified of adjournment
Parties:	Cristy Lee Holder ( Appellant) Jarrett Geerdink ( Respondent)
Representation:	Counsel No appearance ( Appellant) N Deakes ( Respondent)
Solicitors Self-represented ( Appellant) ACT Director of Public Prosecutions ( Respondent)
File Number:	SCA 6 of 2021
Decision under appeal:	Court:	ACT Magistrates Court
	Before:	Magistrate Stewart
	Date of Decision:	15 February 2021
	Case Title:	Geerdink v Holder
	Court File Numbers:	CAN2014/12172 CAN2019/6874 CAN2019/6993 CAN2019/8307

BURNS ACJ:

1. The appellant was sentenced in the ACT Magistrates Court on 15 February 2021 with respect to a number of offences. By a Notice of Appeal lodged 17 February 2021, she appealed against the sentences which were imposed upon her.

1. The matter first came before this Court on 18 March 2021 before a Deputy Registrar when the appellant appeared in person and Mr Deakes, who appears today on behalf of the respondent and who is the applicant in the strike-out application, appeared for the respondent. At that time, the matter was adjourned to 8 April 2021 at 2:30pm.

1. On 8 April 2021 there was no appearance on behalf of the appellant. Mr Deakes again appeared on behalf of the respondent. The matter was further adjourned to 22 April 2021 at 2:30pm. The Deputy Registrar directed that the registry was to notify the appellant of the adjournment. A notice dated 9 April 2021 was mailed to the appellant at the address for service of the appellant as specified on the Notice of Appeal.

1. On 22 April 2021, there was again no appearance by the appellant. Mr Deakes again appeared on behalf of the respondent. The matter was further adjourned to 13 May 2021 at 2:30pm, and the Deputy Registrar again directed that the registry notify the appellant of the listing. By letter dated 23 April 2021, the appellant was notified at her address for service that the matter had been adjourned to 13 May 2021 at 2:30pm. The letter requested that the appellant advise the Deputy Registrar if she no longer wished to proceed with the appeal.

1. On 13 May 2021, there was again no appearance by the appellant. Mr Deakes again appeared on behalf of the respondent. The proceedings were adjourned to 24 June 2021 at 2:30pm. The Deputy Registrar noted at that time that the ACT Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP) who were representing the respondent, foreshadowed an application to strike-out the appeal. The Deputy Registrar directed that the registry notify the appellant of the adjournment. The Deputy Registrar forwarded a letter dated 14 May 2021 to the appellant at her address for service advising her that the matter had been adjourned to 24 June 2021 at 2:30pm

1. In addition, the Court registry forwarded an email to an email address on 14 May 2021. It is not clear to me where that email address came from, but in any event the contents of the email were directed towards Ms Holder, the appellant, and also advised her that the matter had been adjourned to 24 June 2021 at 2:30pm.

1. On 24 June 2021 the matter came back before the Deputy Registrar. There was no appearance on behalf of the appellant and Mr Deakes again appeared on behalf of the respondent. The Deputy Registrar noted that the DPP had filed a strike-out application and the matter was then adjourned before myself today, 7 July 2021 at 10:00am as the Duty Judge, to hear that application.

1. The application was lodged on 23 June 2021 and seeks orders that the appeal be dismissed for want of prosecution. In support of the application was an affidavit of Shaz Naidu, affirmed on 23 June 2021. I have been assured by Mr Deakes that the application and the affidavit have been served on the appellant at the address for service specified on the Notice of Appeal, and an affidavit of service to that effect is to be filed later today.

1. I am satisfied that the appellant is aware of the application before the Court today, in that it has been served on her at her address for service. I am further satisfied that the appellant has taken no steps to progress this appeal since she appeared before the Deputy Registrar on 18 March 2021.

1. I will therefore dismiss the appeal for want of prosecution. I will confirm the orders made by the Magistrate such that the balance of the orders which remained in abeyance at the time of the lodging of the Notice of Appeal and the consequent staying of the sentence imposed by the Magistrate takes effect as of today, 7 July 2021.

I certify that the preceding ten [10] numbered paragraphs are a true copy of the Reasons for Judgment of his Honour Acting Chief Justice Burns.

Associate:

Date: 10 August 2021