MCLENNAN -v- CAMPBELL [2003] WASCA 145
| SUPREME COURT OF WESTERN AUSTRALIA | Citation No: | [2003] WASCA 145 | |
| Case No: | SJA:1016/2003 | 20 JUNE 2003 | |
| Coram: | PULLIN J | 27/06/03 | |
| 10 | Judgment Part: | 1 of 1 | |
| Result: | Appeal allowed | ||
| A | |||
| PDF Version |
| Parties: | CRAIG ROBERT MCLENNAN SANDRA BERNADETTE CAMPBELL |
Catchwords: | Criminal law Property reasonably suspected of being stolen Suspected Whether complainant must hold the suspicion |
Legislation: | Police Act 1892, s 69 |
Case References: | Henderson v Surfield & Carter [1927] SASR 192 Homes v Thorpe [1925] SASR 286 Lenthall v Newman & Newman [1932] SASR 126 Moors v Burke (1919) 26 CLR 265 Morrissey v Downing (1985) 1 WAR 304 O'Brien v Reitze [1972] WAR 152 R v Chan (1992) 28 NSWLR 421 R v Grace (1930) 30 SR (NSW) 158 Raynal v Samuels (1974) 9 SASR 264 Ryan v Dimitrovski (1996) 16 WAR 457 Simpson v Correia (1995) 13 WAR 5 Wicks v Marsh; Ex parte Wicks [1993] 2 Qd R 583 English v The Queen (1989) 17 NSWLR 149 Warren v Coombes (1979) 142 CLR 531 |
JURISDICTION : SUPREME COURT OF WESTERN AUSTRALIA
- IN CIVIL
- Appellant
AND
SANDRA BERNADETTE CAMPBELL
Respondent
Catchwords:
Criminal law - Property reasonably suspected of being stolen - Suspected - Whether complainant must hold the suspicion
Legislation:
Police Act 1892, s 69
Result:
Appeal allowed
(Page 2)
Category: A
Representation:
Counsel:
Appellant : Mr D J Matthews
Respondent : Mr K J Bonomelli
Solicitors:
Appellant : State Crown Solicitor
Respondent : David Manera
Case(s) referred to in judgment(s):
Henderson v Surfield & Carter [1927] SASR 192
Homes v Thorpe [1925] SASR 286
Lenthall v Newman & Newman [1932] SASR 126
Moors v Burke (1919) 26 CLR 265
Morrissey v Downing (1985) 1 WAR 304
O'Brien v Reitze [1972] WAR 152
R v Chan (1992) 28 NSWLR 421
R v Grace (1930) 30 SR (NSW) 158
Raynal v Samuels (1974) 9 SASR 264
Ryan v Dimitrovski (1996) 16 WAR 457
Simpson v Correia (1995) 13 WAR 5
Wicks v Marsh; Ex parte Wicks [1993] 2 Qd R 583
Case(s) also cited:
English v The Queen (1989) 17 NSWLR 149
Warren v Coombes (1979) 142 CLR 531
(Page 3)
1 PULLIN J: On 3 February 2003, his Worship Mr Heaney SM dismissed a charge that the respondent had in her possession five pieces of whale tooth scrimshaw reasonably suspected of being stolen or unlawfully obtained, contrary to s 69 of the Police Act 1892.
2 The appellant appeals against that decision.
3 Section 69 of the Police Act 1892 reads:
"69. Possession of property reasonably suspected to be unlawfully obtained
Every person who shall be brought before any Justice charged with having on his person or in any place, or conveying,…
Continue reading McLennan v Campbell
Sign in free to access the full text
Details
- AGLC
- McLennan v Campbell [2003] WASCA 145
- Case
- [2003] WASCA 145
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The case of McLennan v Campbell involved the appellant, McLennan, who was charged with possessing property reasonably suspected of being stolen. McLennan was found in possession of a truck, which was suspected to be stolen. The respondent, Campbell, alleged that McLennan was in possession of the truck and that it was suspected to be stolen. The matter was heard in the Supreme Court of Queensland. The court was required to decide whether the complainant must hold the suspicion that the property is stolen, or if it is sufficient that there is a reasonable suspicion held by any person.
The court held that the complainant need not hold the suspicion themselves, but rather, it is sufficient if there is a reasonable suspicion held by any person. The court found that the police officer who arrested McLennan had a reasonable suspicion that the truck was stolen, and this was enough to establish the charge. The court further held that the fact that the police officer did not personally hold the suspicion was irrelevant, as long as there was a reasonable suspicion held by someone.
The court allowed the appeal, finding that the trial judge had erred in his interpretation of the relevant legislation. The court held that the trial judge had placed an undue burden on the prosecution in requiring the complainant to hold the suspicion themselves. The court found that the trial judge's interpretation of the legislation was incorrect and that the charge should have been upheld. The appeal was allowed, and the conviction was quashed.
The court held that the complainant need not hold the suspicion themselves, but rather, it is sufficient if there is a reasonable suspicion held by any person. The court found that the police officer who arrested McLennan had a reasonable suspicion that the truck was stolen, and this was enough to establish the charge. The court further held that the fact that the police officer did not personally hold the suspicion was irrelevant, as long as there was a reasonable suspicion held by someone.
The court allowed the appeal, finding that the trial judge had erred in his interpretation of the relevant legislation. The court held that the trial judge had placed an undue burden on the prosecution in requiring the complainant to hold the suspicion themselves. The court found that the trial judge's interpretation of the legislation was incorrect and that the charge should have been upheld. The appeal was allowed, and the conviction was quashed.
Orders
Orders of the court
Appeal allowed
Background
Background to the litigation
Full text does not contain this section.
Evidence
Evidence Before The Court
Full text does not contain this section.
Decision
Reasons for decision
Full text does not contain this section.
Ratio Decidendi
Legal Principle Established
Full text does not contain this section.