Police v Garnett

The police appealed against the decision of a magistrate who found that the respondent's offence of driving with excess blood alcohol was trifling. The respondent had moved his vehicle from a loading zone to avoid a fine or towing, driving a short distance while over the legal limit. The police argued that the offence was typical and not trifling. The appeal was heard in the Supreme Court of South Australia.

The court needed to decide whether the magistrate's finding that the offence was trifling was reasonable. The appeal hinged on whether the respondent's actions constituted an unusual or atypical example of the offence, which would justify a reduction in the disqualification period for the offence. The appeal required the court to consider whether the magistrate's conclusion was reasonably open based on the circumstances of the offence.

The court held that the magistrate erred in concluding that the offence was trifling. The court found that the respondent's actions were deliberate and conscious, driven by convenience rather than an emergency or humanitarian situation. The court emphasised that driving with excess blood alcohol is an offence intended to prevent the danger of such conduct. The court found that the circumstances did not justify a finding that the offence was trifling. The appeal was allowed, and the court set aside the magistrate's finding that the offence was trifling. The court ordered a further disqualification period of three months and one week, making the total disqualification period six months.

The court ordered that the respondent be disqualified from holding a driver’s licence for a further period of three months and one week, bringing the total disqualification period to six months. The court directed that the parties be heard regarding the commencement of the further disqualification period.