Nation v The Queen - [2016] NSWCCA 115

Court of Criminal Appeal

Supreme Court

New South Wales

Summary available

Medium Neutral Citation: Nation v R [2016] NSWCCA 115
Hearing dates: 18 May 2016
Decision date: 15 June 2016
Before: Basten JA at [1];
Schmidt J at [65];
Wilson J at [66]
Decision:
(1) Grant the applicant leave to appeal against her convictions.
(2) Dismiss the appeal.
Catchwords:
APPEAL – criminal conviction – application for leave – whether verdicts unreasonable
CRIME – motor vehicle accident – dangerous driving causing death – dangerous driving causing grievous bodily harm
Legislation Cited: Crimes Act 1900 (NSW), s 52A
Criminal Appeal Act 1912 (NSW), s 6
Evidence Act 1995 (NSW), s 191
Cases Cited: Jiminez v The Queen (1992) 173 CLR 572
McBride v The Queen (1966) 115 CLR 44
SKA v The Queen (2011) 243 CLR 400; [2011] HCA 13
The King v Coventry (1938) 59 CLR 633
Category: Principal judgment
Parties: Adel Louise Nation (Applicant)
Regina (Respondent)
Representation:
Counsel:
W Hunt/M Curry (Applicant)
H Baker (Respondent)
Solicitors:
M Lorkin (Applicant)
C Hyland, Solicitor for Public Prosecutions (Respondent)

File Number(s): 2012/139161
Decision under appeal

Court or tribunal:

District Court

Jurisdiction:

Criminal

Date of Decision:

13 February 2015

Before:

Wells DCJ SC

File Number(s):

2012/139161

Judgment

BASTEN JA: At about 10am on 11 November 2011, the applicant, Adel Louise Nation, was driving north along the Pacific Highway near Chatsworth Island (west of Yamba and between Grafton and Ballina). The inside lane in which she was travelling came to an end and she was required to merge into the remaining northbound lane. In doing so, she lost control of her vehicle, crossed the single lane in front of a B-double truck and collided with a Tarago van travelling south, killing both the driver and the front seat passenger of that vehicle. Her own son was also seriously injured in the collision.
On 4 June 2014 the Director of Public Prosecutions presented an indictment containing two charges of driving in a manner dangerous to other persons and causing death (Crimes Act 1900 (NSW), s 52A(1)(c)) and one charge of driving in a manner dangerous and causing grievous bodily harm (s 52A(3)(c)). Following her pleas of not guilty, she was tried by Wells DCJ SC and a jury at Lismore. On 12 June the jury returned verdicts of guilty on all three charges.
For reasons which were obscure, she was not sentenced until 13 February 2015, when she received a non-parole period of 18 months, to expire on 12 August 2016 with an additional term of 18 months. For reasons which are also obscure, and quite unfortunate, no application for leave to appeal was filed until 8 February 2016, after she had served all but six months of her non-parole period. The appeal was limited to a challenge to the verdicts on the basis that they were unreasonable and could not be supported having regard to the whole of the evidence. To address that ground it is necessary for this Court to consider…

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 Nation v The Queen

Details

AGLC: Nation v The Queen [2016] NSWCCA 115
Case: [2016] NSWCCA 115
Decision Date: 15 June 2016

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In the case of Nation v The Queen, the appellant, Nation, appealed against his conviction for dangerous driving causing death and grievous bodily harm. The appeal was heard by the High Court of Australia. Nation had been driving a vehicle that collided with another vehicle, resulting in the death of one person and causing grievous bodily harm to another. The prosecution argued that Nation had been driving dangerously, leading to the fatal accident.

The primary legal issue before the court was whether the jury's verdicts were unreasonable. Nation argued that the evidence presented was not sufficient to prove that he was driving dangerously at the time of the accident. The court had to determine whether the jury had properly considered all the evidence and applied the correct legal principles in reaching their verdicts.

The High Court held that the jury had not erred in their consideration of the evidence or in their application of the law. The court found that the evidence was sufficient to support the jury's conclusion that Nation was driving dangerously at the time of the accident. The court rejected Nation's argument that the verdicts were unreasonable, stating that the jury had properly considered all the evidence and applied the correct legal principles. Consequently, the appeal was dismissed.

No additional orders were made by the court in this matter.

Orders