Potts v NT of A - [2005] NTSC 16

[Back to Main List] [Back to NTSC 2005 List] Potts v NT of A & Ors [2005] NTSC 16

PARTIES: MICHAEL WAYNE POTTS
v
NORTHERN TERRITORY OF AUSTRALIA
and
ANTHONY RUBUNTJA
and
NOEL PAREROULTJA
and
TERRY PAREROULTJA
and
KELLY PAREROULTJA
and
JERMAINE PAREROULTJA
and
BENJAMIN INKAMALA

TITLE OF COURT: SUPREME COURT OF THE NORTHERN TERRITORY at Alice Springs

JURISDICTION: SUPREME COURT OF THE NORTHERN TERRITORY exercising Territory jurisdiction

FILE NO: 55/2003 (20201782)

DELIVERED: 24 March 2005

HEARING DATES: 5 March 2005

JUDGMENT OF: MARTIN (BF) AJ

CATCHWORDS:

REPRESENTATION:
Counsel:
Appellant: O Khan
Respondent: M Heitmann
Solicitors:
Appellant: Morgan Buckley
Respondent: Mark Heitmann

Judgment category classification: C
Judgment ID Number: Mar(BF)0501
Number of pages: 14

IN THE SUPREME COURT
OF THE NORTHERN TERRITORY
OF AUSTRALIA
AT ALICE SPRINGS

Potts v NTofA & Ors [2005] NTSC 16
No. 55/2003 (20201782)

BETWEEN:

MICAEL WAYNE POTTS
Appellant

AND:

NORTHERN TERRITORY OF AUSTRALIA
First Respondent

and
ANTHONY RUBUNTJA
Second Respondent

and
NOEL PAREROULJTA
Third Respondent

and
TERRY PAREROULTJA
Fourth Respondent

and
KELLY PAREROULJTA
Fifth Respondent

and
JERMAINE PAREROULJTA
Sixth Respondent

and
BENJAMIN INKAMALA
Seventh Respondent

CORAM: MARTIN (BF) AJ

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT

(Delivered 24 March 2005)

[1] Appeal under the Local Court Act from the issue of an Assistance Certificate pursuant to s 8 of the Crimes (Victims Assistance) Act as in operation prior to the amendments by the Crimes (Victims Assistance) Act of 2002 (“the Act”). Hence, the joining of the Northern Territory of Australia and other parties joined (s7) hereafter called “the offenders”.
[2] The application made by the appellant was in respect of injuries sustained by him in an incident involving a number of police and Aboriginals at Hidden Valley near Alice Springs on 12 July 2001. Police had pursued a motor vehicle driven by Anthony Rubuntja which had failed to stop at a random breath testing station. There were three passengers in the vehicle. It was driven along the streets of Alice Springs at high speed and in an erratic manner before arriving at Hidden Valley. The driver jumped out of the vehicle whilst it was still moving (estimated at 50kmph) and the vehicle continued until it collided with a fence. The police then stopped their vehicles and got out. One of the passengers in the vehicle, Jermaine Pareroultja, was “apprehended”. A violent fight followed between the police and the offenders during which the appellant was injured.
[3] The learned Magistrate considered that the amount of the Assistance Certificate to be issued under s 9 of the Act (if the appellant was wholly successful) would be $10,000. He went on to reduce that sum by $4,000 taking into account injuries caused to the appellant when bitten by “camp dogs”. His Worship also held that the appellant “contributed significantly to the incident” and reduced that sum by one third on that account. The Certificate therefore was to be in the sum of $4,000.
[4] The appellant says that his Worship erred in law in respect of both deductions. As to the injuries…

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.

Keep reading for free

Create a free CaseChat account to read Potts v NT of A and more:

Read every judgment in full
Ask AI and get answers linked to paragraphs
See how each paragraph was cited in later cases
Download judgments as PDF or Word

Continue with Google

One click creates your free account or signs you in.

By continuing you agree to the Terms and Privacy Policy.

Details

Case: [2005] NTSC 16
Decision Date: 24 March 2005

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The case of Potts v Northern Territory of Australia and others [2005] NTSC 16 involved an appeal by Michael Wayne Potts against the issue of an Assistance Certificate under the Crimes (Victims Assistance) Act. The dispute arose from an incident at Hidden Valley near Alice Springs on 12 July 2001, where Potts, a police officer, was injured during a confrontation with a group of Aboriginals. The key legal issues revolved around the Magistrate's deductions from the Assistance Certificate amount, which was initially set at $10,000 but reduced to $4,000 after considering injuries from dog bites and the appellant's conduct during the incident.

The court was required to determine whether the deductions made by the Magistrate were lawful. Specifically, the court examined whether the injuries from dog bites should have been considered in reducing the Assistance Certificate and whether the reduction due to the appellant's conduct was appropriate. The appellant argued that the Magistrate erred in law by reducing the amount for dog bite injuries, as the dog's owner could not be identified. The court held that regardless of ownership, the act of inciting the dog to attack constituted an offence, and thus, the deduction should not have been made. On the issue of the appellant's conduct, the court found that the Magistrate's reduction by one third was justified, as the unlawful arrest of Jermaine Pareroultja contributed to the incident. The court concluded that while not all injuries were due to the appellant's conduct, his unlawful actions were a significant contributing factor, justifying the reduction.

The appeal was allowed, and the court ordered that the Assistance Certificate be issued in the sum of $6,666.67.

Orders