R v Bobolas; R v Bobolas - [2019] NSWDC 955

District Court

New South Wales

Medium Neutral Citation: R v Bobolas; R v Bobolas [2019] NSWDC 955
Date of orders: 27 February 2019
Decision date: 27 February 2019
Jurisdiction: Criminal
Before: Sutherland SC DCJ
Decision:
At [139]

Catchwords:
CRIME — Appeal and review — Appeal from Local Court to District Court — By person against refusal of annulment application

Legislation Cited:
Crimes Act 1900 (NSW)
Crimes (Appeal and Review) Act 2001 (NSW)
Law Enforcement (Powers and Responsibilities) Act 2002 (NSW)
Local Government Act 1993 (NSW)

Cases Cited:
Bobolas v Waverley Council (2016) 92 NSWLR 406; [2016] NSWCA 139
Bobolas v Waverley Council [2015] NSWCA 204
Bobolas v Waverley Council [2015] NSWCA 216
Boulghaurgian v Ryde City Council
Gino Cassiniti v Director of Public Prosecutions (2008) NSWDC 2
Magjarraj v Asteron Life Limited [2009] NSWSC 1433
Miller v DPP [2004] NSWCA 90
Rukabina v DPP [2008] NSWDC 214
The Police v Edwards (2008) NSWLC 28
Waverley Council v Bobolas (No 2) [2015] NSWLEC 66
Waverley Council v Bobolas [2018] NSWLEC 116
Willis v R [2014] NSWDC 325

Category: Principal judgment
Parties: Regina
Liana Bobolas
Elena Bobolas
Representation: Solicitors:
Solicitor for Public Prosecutions

File Number(s): 2015/00211426
2015/00212747
2015/00212772
2015/00232871

Judgment

Liana Bobolas and Elena Bobolas appear in these proceedings by way of appeals from decisions of magistrates in the Local Court respectively made against each of them. In both cases applications to annul convictions which had been recorded against each of them following ex parte hearings at Waverley Local Court were refused. It is appropriate, notwithstanding that there are individual considerations in each case, to deal with the matters together.
It is necessary to outline the background to these proceedings. Liana and Elena Bobolas both reside at 19 Boonara Avenue, Bondi. Their mother Mrs Mary Bobolas is the registered proprietor of that property. Liana and Elena are sisters. The state of the property and the accumulation of substantial quantities of rubbish, waste and other items around the house on the property has been the subject of extensive litigation between Waverley Council and various of the occupants including the two applicants and their mother since at least 2005.
There has been considerable media attention and publicity about the state of the property and the circumstances surrounding what I would describe as regular litigation brought by the council against the occupants. A summary of some of the proceedings is set out in the judgment of Pain J in the New South Wales Land and Environment Court on 27 August 2018: see Waverley Council v Bobolas [2018] NSWLEC 116 at [55] to [60].
It suffices to observe in summary that Waverley Council have sought and obtained orders from the Land and Environment Court on occasion permitting it to exercise relevant functions under the Local Government Act and in particular to carry out work orders for the clean‑up of the property. The extensive litigation has on occasion proceeded to the Court of Appeal in the Supreme Court of New South Wales.
In April…

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 R v Bobolas; R v Bobolas

Details

AGLC: R v Bobolas; R v Bobolas [2019] NSWDC 955
Case: [2019] NSWDC 955
Decision Date: 27 February 2019

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The appeal was brought by Bobolas against the refusal of an application to annul his conviction in the Local Court. The original matter involved charges of possession of dangerous drugs and possession of a prohibited plant. The District Court was required to determine the validity of the application to annul the conviction. The appeal hinged on whether the application was correctly dismissed by the Local Court.

The legal issues centred on the procedural correctness of the Local Court’s decision to dismiss the application to annul the conviction. The appellant argued that there were substantial procedural errors in the original proceedings which warranted an annulment of the conviction. The appellant contended that the Local Court failed to properly consider the application and overlooked critical evidence which could have altered the outcome of the case.

The District Court examined the procedural fairness and the correctness of the Local Court's decision. It held that the application was not meritorious and did not disclose any basis for annulment. The court found that the appellant had not provided sufficient grounds to warrant an annulment and that the original conviction was valid. The District Court dismissed the appeal, affirming the decision of the Local Court. The District Court found no error in the Local Court's handling of the application and upheld the conviction.

Orders

Orders of the court

At [139]

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.

Medium Neutral Citation:	R v Bobolas; R v Bobolas [2019] NSWDC 955
Date of orders:	27 February 2019
Decision date:	27 February 2019
Jurisdiction:	Criminal
Before:	Sutherland SC DCJ
Decision:	At [139]
Catchwords:	CRIME — Appeal and review — Appeal from Local Court to District Court — By person against refusal of annulment application
Legislation Cited:	Crimes Act 1900 (NSW) Crimes (Appeal and Review) Act 2001 (NSW) Law Enforcement (Powers and Responsibilities) Act 2002 (NSW) Local Government Act 1993 (NSW)
Cases Cited:	Bobolas v Waverley Council (2016) 92 NSWLR 406; [2016] NSWCA 139 Bobolas v Waverley Council [2015] NSWCA 204 Bobolas v Waverley Council [2015] NSWCA 216 Boulghaurgian v Ryde City Council Gino Cassiniti v Director of Public Prosecutions (2008) NSWDC 2 Magjarraj v Asteron Life Limited [2009] NSWSC 1433 Miller v DPP [2004] NSWCA 90 Rukabina v DPP [2008] NSWDC 214 The Police v Edwards (2008) NSWLC 28 Waverley Council v Bobolas (No 2) [2015] NSWLEC 66 Waverley Council v Bobolas [2018] NSWLEC 116 Willis v R [2014] NSWDC 325
Category:	Principal judgment
Parties:	Regina Liana Bobolas Elena Bobolas
Representation:	Solicitors: Solicitor for Public Prosecutions
File Number(s):	2015/00211426 2015/00212747 2015/00212772 2015/00232871