Police v Bleeze

The Full Court of the Supreme Court of South Australia heard an appeal by the Police against an acquittal of a defendant, who had been convicted by a Magistrate of failing to comply with reasonable directions of a police officer in relation to a requirement to submit to a breath analysis. The defendant had successfully appealed to a single Judge, who acquitted him.

The central legal issue before the Full Court was whether the single Judge erred in finding that a direction given under section 47E(2) of the *Road Traffic Act 1961* (SA) was unlawful unless the prosecution proved the breath analysing instrument was in proper working order. Related issues included whether the Magistrate wrongly concluded the defendant deliberately failed to comply, whether the directions were unreasonable because the officer knew or ought to have known the instrument was faulty, and whether the Magistrate erred in rejecting the defendant's claim of 'good cause' for non-compliance.

The Court determined that the legislative regime did not require proof of the breath analysing instrument's proper working order as a precondition for a lawful requirement to submit to analysis. The offence under section 47E(3) concerns the obstruction or evasion of a lawful requirement by failing to comply with reasonable directions. The Court found that the single Judge had erred in imposing a requirement for proof of the instrument's working order, which was not mandated by the statute. The Court also addressed the defence of 'good cause' for non-compliance, noting the statutory limitations on relying on physical or medical conditions without a blood sample being taken or reasonably unable to be taken.

The Full Court allowed the appeal, set aside the single Judge's order of acquittal, and restored the Magistrate's conviction.