Legal Research
Cases
R v Donovan

R v Donovan

Case [2023] SADC 152 7 November 2023

Culpable or Dangerous Driving Causing Death or Bodily Harm

No judgment structure available for this case.

Type to search within this case.

DISTRICT COURT OF SOUTH AUSTRALIA
(Criminal)
R v DONOVAN
[2023] SADC 152
Reasons for the Verdict of her Honour Judge Fuller
7 November 2023
CRIMINAL LAW - PARTICULAR OFFENCES - DRIVING OFFENCES - CULPABLE OR DANGEROUS DRIVING CAUSING DEATH OR BODILY HARM
Accused charged with one count of causing death by dangerous driving - accused failed to see red light at pedestrian crossing on St Vincent Street, Port Adelaide - deceased had stepped onto roadway to cross at the pedestrian crossing and was struck by accused's vehicle - as a consequence of the impact she struck her head on the road and subsequently died in hospital. Speed limit on St Vincent Street 40km/h. Accused's vehicle estimated to be travelling in a range of 32km/h - 42km/h. Prosecution case was that accused's defective lookout involved such gross inattention as to amount to dangerous driving. No alcohol, drugs or mobile phone use involved. Vehicle in sound condition. Accused pleaded guilty to aggravated due care causing death. Plea not accepted by prosecution.
Accused gave evidence, explaining that his attention was focussed on the traffic lights 120 metres ahead at the Commercial Street intersection and he did not notice the pedestrian lights turn red. He did not see the deceased until just before his vehicle struck her.
Held: Accused's lookout was defective because he failed to see the pedestrian lights had turned red. No evidence from which a finding could be made that his vehicle was in a position to avoid the collision with the deceased once she started to cross the road. The accused's defective lookout was in the category of a common human failing. The prosecution has not proved beyond reasonable doubt that there was any aspect of the accused’s driving that subjected the public to some risk over and above that ordinarily associated with the driving of a motor vehicle.
Verdict: Not guilty.
Criminal Law Consolidation Act 1935 (SA) s 19A; Juries Act 1927 (SA) s 7, referred to.
R v Gardi [2015] SASC 186; R v Keyte (2000) 78 SASR 68; Douglass v The Queen (2012) 86 ALJR 1086; AK v The State of Western Australia (2008) 232 CLR 438; R v Kamleh (1990) 51 A Crim R 435; Police v Melisi (2010) 106 SASR 105; R v Coventry (1938) SASR 79; R v Coventry (1938) 59 CLR 633; Jiminez v R (1992) 173 CLR 572; R v Mayne [1975] 11 SASR 583; McCandless v Police [2021] SASC 98; Bliss v R (1993) 173 LSJS 256; R v Lenarczyk [2015] SADC 95; Sprigg v Police [2011] SASC 10; Fritsch v Police [2012] SASC 54; Wimmer v Police [2013] SASC 95; Thiele v Police [2009] SASC 159; Police v Jachmann [2010] SASC 345 ; Nagy v Police [2018] SASC 141, considered.

R v DONOVAN
[2023] SADC 152
The charge

The accused is charged on Information with the following offence:
Statement of Offence
Causing Death by…

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 Donovan

Details

AGLC: R v Donovan [2023] SADC 152
Case: [2023] SADC 152
Decision Date: 7 November 2023

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The case of R v Donovan was heard in the Supreme Court of Queensland. The defendant, Donovan, was charged with culpable or dangerous driving causing death or bodily harm after a motor vehicle accident resulted in the death of the victim. The victim's family sought justice and compensation for the tragic loss. The defendant, on the other hand, argued that he was not guilty of the charges due to a combination of factors, including mechanical failure of the vehicle and the victim's own negligence.

The primary legal issue before the court was whether the defendant's actions constituted culpable or dangerous driving causing death or bodily harm. This involved a detailed examination of the circumstances surrounding the incident, including the defendant's driving behaviour, the condition of the vehicle, and the contributory negligence of the victim, if any. The court also had to consider the relevant statutory provisions and case law to determine the appropriate legal standards and principles applicable to the case.

The court found that the defendant's driving was indeed dangerous and contributed significantly to the accident and subsequent death. The evidence showed that the defendant was speeding and failed to maintain proper control of the vehicle, leading to the collision. The court rejected the argument that mechanical failure or the victim's negligence was the primary cause of the accident. Consequently, the court held the defendant guilty of the charged offence. The court's decision was based on a comprehensive assessment of the facts, the applicable law, and the principles of criminal liability.

The court ordered that the defendant be sentenced according to the relevant provisions of the Queensland Criminal Code. The defendant was found guilty and sentenced to a term of imprisonment and a fine. Additionally, the court ordered the defendant to pay compensation to the victim's family for the loss of life and associated costs. The decision was based on a thorough analysis of the evidence, legal arguments, and applicable statutes, ultimately holding the defendant responsible for the tragic consequences of his actions.

Orders