KJG v Tasmania - [2024] TASSC 34

[2024] TASSC 34

COURT:	SUPREME COURT OF TASMANIA
CITATION:	KJG v Tasmania [2024] TASSC 34
PARTIES:	KJG
v
STATE OF TASMANIA
FILE NO:	3314/2022
DELIVERED ON:	5 July 2024
DELIVERED AT:	Hobart
HEARING DATE:	15 May 2023
JUDGMENT OF:	Blow CJ
CATCHWORDS:

Traffic Law – Licensing of drivers – Tasmania – Disqualification, cancellation or suspension of licences – Generally – Power of Magistrates Court (Youth Justice Division) – Whether disqualification may be imposed when no conviction recorded.

Aust Dig Traffic Law [1059]

Case referred to:

Attorney-General v Smith [2002] TASSC 10.

Legislation:

Road Safety (Alcohol and Drugs) Act 1970 (Tas), s 17(3)

REPRESENTATION:

Counsel:

Applicant: C Jones
Respondent: L King-Roberts

Solicitors:

Applicant: Tasmania Legal Aid
Respondent: Director of Public Prosecutions

Judgment Number:	[2024] TASSC 34
Number of paragraphs:	23

Serial No 34/2024 File No 3314/2022

KJG v STATE OF TASMANIA

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT

BLOW CJ 5 July 2024

1 This is a motion for the review of a driving disqualification order made by the Chief Magistrate, Ms C Geason, in proceedings in the Youth Justice Division of the Magistrates Court. In May 2022 the applicant pleaded guilty to a number of charges, including a charge of driving a motor vehicle whilst a prescribed illicit drug was present in his oral fluid, contrary to s 6A(1) of the Road Safety (Alcohol and Drugs) Act 1970. Her Honour made a release and adjournment order under s 47(1)(d) of the Youth Justice Act 1997. Convictions were not recorded but, on the charge that I have mentioned, her Honour ordered that the applicant be disqualified from driving for 9 months with effect from 15 November 2022.
2 The applicant contends that her Honour did not have the power to order his disqualification from driving in the situation where no conviction was recorded.
3 Section 5(a) of the Sentencing Act 1997 provides that, subject to an exception of no present relevance, that Act does not apply to the Magistrates Court (Youth Justice Division). The sentencing regime in the Youth Justice Division is governed by the Youth Justice Act. Section 47(1) of that Act lists a number of different sentencing options that are available to magistrates sentencing youths. Relevantly, s 47(1)(d) empowers a magistrate to "release the youth and adjourn the proceedings on conditions". By virtue of s 49(1) of that Act, when the Magistrates Court imposes a sentence under s 47(1)(d), "a conviction is not to be recorded".
4 Section 49(5) of the Youth Justice Act provides as follows:

"Except as otherwise provided by this or any other Act, a finding of guilty without the
recording of a conviction is not taken to be a conviction for any purpose."

5 Section 46(2) of the Youth Justice Act contains the following:

"(2) When determining a sentence, the Court –
…

(c) must comply with a requirement under any other Act that a loss of a licence or other penalty, other than an amount of money…

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 KJG v Tasmania

Details

AGLC: KJG v Tasmania [2024] TASSC 34
Case: [2024] TASSC 34
Decision Date: 5 July 2024

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The case of KJG v Tasmania involved a young driver who was caught driving without a valid licence. The matter was heard in the Youth Justice Division of the Magistrates Court of Tasmania. The legal issue before the court was whether the Magistrates Court had the authority to impose a disqualification on a driver's licence when no conviction had been recorded. The young driver had argued that the court lacked the power to impose such a penalty without a conviction.

The court examined the relevant legislation, including the Road Management Act 2008 (Tas) and the Road Management (General) Regulations 2009 (Tas). It considered whether the Magistrates Court (Youth Justice Division) had the power to disqualify a driver from holding or obtaining a licence when no conviction was recorded. The court noted that, while the Magistrates Court had the power to make orders to disqualify a person from holding or obtaining a licence, this power was generally exercised in conjunction with a conviction. However, the court also found that the legislation did not expressly limit the court's power to make such an order even in the absence of a conviction. The court ultimately decided that the Magistrates Court (Youth Justice Division) did have the power to disqualify a driver from holding or obtaining a licence, even in the absence of a conviction.

The court's decision clarified the scope of the Magistrates Court's power to disqualify drivers in the Youth Justice Division. It found that the court could impose a disqualification even when no conviction had been recorded, provided that it was satisfied that the disqualification was necessary in the interests of public safety. The court also noted that the decision should be exercised with caution, and that the court should consider the circumstances of each case before imposing a disqualification. The court ordered that the young driver's licence be disqualified for a period of six months.

Orders