Peter Byrne v Jason Peter Hulbert - [2009] ACTSC 124

PETER BYRNE v JASON PETER HULBERT [2009] ACTSC 124 (25 September 2009)

APPEAL – appeal from convictions recorded in the Magistrates Court – appellant convicted of failing to stop at a stop line at a red traffic light – red light camera evidence related to red traffic arrow – wrong provision cited in summons – pleas of guilty – whether convictions arising from guilty pleas can be overturned – whether appellant could have been found guilty of the offences charged – appeal against conviction upheld – effect on demerit points.
TRAFFIC LAW – particular offence – failing to stop at a stop line at traffic lights in contravention of r 56 Australian Road Rules – whether offence committed – vehicle must stop before reaching stop line.
CRIMINAL PROCEDURE – power of court to amend information or summons – appellant summonsed under wrong provision – information or summons may be amended only if variance between particulars set out in information or summons and evidence adduced at hearing – amendment that changes offence charged is impermissible – operation of s 28 Magistrates Court Act 1930 (ACT).
TRAFFIC LAW – demerit points – effect of appeal from conviction on demerit points required to be added to ACT register – effect of appeal on demerit points required to be notified to another jurisdiction for entry on other jurisdiction’s register.

Legislation Act 2001 (ACT), s 192
Magistrates Court Act 1930 (ACT), ss 28, 216, 208
Road Transport (Driver Licensing) Act 1999 (ACT), ss 32, 14, 13, 16, 17, 8, 12
Road Transport (Driver Licensing) Act 1998 (NSW), s 11
Road Transport (General) Act 1999 (ACT), ss 53, 31

Road Transport (Driver Licensing) Regulation 2000 (ACT), reg 137A
Road Transport (Safety and Traffic Management) Regulation 2000 (ACT), reg 6
Road Transport (Offences) Regulation 2005 (ACT), Schedule Part 1.2

Australian Road Rules, r 56

DPP (Cth) v Hussein (2003) 8 VR 92
Wade v Evans (2003) 180 FLR 290

ON APPEAL FROM THE MAGISTRATES COURT OF THE AUSTRALIAN CAPITAL TERRITORY

No. SCA 34 of 2008

Judge: Penfold J
Supreme Court of the ACT

Date: 25 September 2009

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE     )
  )          No. SCA 34 of 2008
AUSTRALIAN CAPITAL TERRITORY )

ON APPEAL FROM THE MAGISTRATES COURT OF THE AUSTRALIAN CAPITAL TERRITORY

BETWEEN:PETER BYRNE

Appellant

AND:JASON PETER HULBERT
Respondent

ORDER

Judge:  Penfold J
Date:  25 September 2009
Place:  Canberra

THE COURT ORDERS THAT:

(a) the appeal is upheld;

(b) the two convictions of Peter Byrne, for failing to stop at a red traffic light on 17 August and 19 August 2007, are set aside.

Introduction

Peter Byrne appeals from convictions recorded in the Magistrates Court in relation to two offences of failing to stop at the stop line at a red traffic light, being offences arising under r 56 of the Australian Road Rules (the Road Rules). He was given leave to appeal out of time on 2 May 2008.

Background

Circumstances of the offences

Early on 17 August 2007, Mr…

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 Peter Byrne v Jason Peter Hulbert

Details

AGLC: Peter Byrne v Jason Peter Hulbert [2009] ACTSC 124
Case: [2009] ACTSC 124
Decision Date: 25 September 2009

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In the case of Peter Byrne v Jason Peter Hulbert, the appellant, Peter Byrne, was appealing against two convictions recorded in the Magistrates Court of the Australian Capital Territory. Byrne was convicted of failing to stop at a stop line at a red traffic light. The convictions were based on evidence from a red light camera, specifically related to a red traffic arrow, although the summons had cited a different provision. Both convictions followed pleas of guilty. The appeal raised issues regarding the validity of convictions arising from guilty pleas, the correctness of the charges, and the implications for demerit points.

The primary legal issues were whether convictions based on guilty pleas could be overturned and whether Byrne could have been found guilty of the offences charged. The court had to consider the accuracy of the cited provisions in the summons and whether the summons could be amended to align with the evidence presented. Section 28 of the Magistrates Court Act 1930 (ACT) was pertinent, as it provided that an information or summons may be amended if there is a variance between the particulars set out in the information or summons and the evidence adduced at the hearing, but an amendment that changes the offence charged is impermissible.

The court found that the summons had cited the wrong provision, which was a fundamental error. Given that the summons could not be amended to change the offence charged, the convictions were invalid. Consequently, the appeal was upheld, and the two convictions were set aside. This decision also had implications for the demerit points system, requiring notification to another jurisdiction for entry on its register.

The court’s decision to uphold the appeal and set aside the convictions was based on the legal principle that a summons cannot be amended to change the offence charged. This ruling ensured that Byrne's convictions, based on an incorrect citation, were properly annulled, and it underscored the importance of accurate legal citations in summons.

Orders

Orders of the court

(a) the appeal is upheld;

(b) the two convictions of Peter Byrne, for failing to stop at a red traffic light on 17 August and 19 August 2007, are set aside.

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.