SUPREME COURT OF THE AUSTRALIAN CAPITAL TERRITORY
Case Title: | R v Elphick (No 3) |
Citation: | [2017] ACTSC 302 |
Submissions Date: | 10 October 2017 |
DecisionDate: | 18 October 2017 |
Before: | Refshauge J |
Decision: | That paragraph 2 of the order of the Court in The Queen v Todd Elphick (No 2) [2015] ACTSC 23 be amended by: (1) omitting “cumulative as to” and substituting “concurrent as to approximately”; and (2) omitting “1 October” and substituting “21 October” and the same amendments be made to paragraph [97] of the reasons for sentence. |
Catchwords: | PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – JUDGMENTS AND ORDERS – Amendment – accidental slip or omission – power to amend – slip rule – inherent jurisdiction of the Court – reconsideration of an order – r 6906 of the Court Procedures Rules 2006 (ACT) CRIMINAL LAW – JURISDICTION, PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – Judgment and punishment – transferral of sentence to another jurisdiction – amendment of a transferred sentence – Ch 12 of the Crimes (Sentence Administration) Act 2005 (ACT) |
Legislation Cited: | Compensation Court Act 1984 (NSW), s 36(1) Crimes (Interstate Transfer of Community Based Sentences) Act 2004 (NSW), ss 20(1)(a), 24, 24(3), 24(5) Court Procedures Rules 2006 (ACT), r 6906 |
Cases Cited: | Bakewell v The Queen [2009] HCA 24; 238 CLR 287 Brennand v Hartung (No 3) [2015] ACTSC 149 |
Texts Cited: | Associate Professor Tarrant, Amending Final Judgments and Orders (The Federation Press, 2010) |
Parties: | The Queen (Crown) Todd William Elphick (Defendant) |
Representation: | Counsel Mr T Hickey (Crown) Mr R Davies (Defendant) |
| Solicitors ACT Director of Public Prosecutions (Crown) Legal Aid ACT (Defendant) | |
File Number: | SCC 183 of 2013 |
REFSHAUGE J:
Continue reading R v Elphick (No 3)
Sign in free to access the full text
- AGLC
- R v Elphick (No 3) [2017] ACTSC 302
- Case
- [2017] ACTSC 302
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The legal issues centered on the Court's power to amend its orders in the event of an accidental slip or omission, and the applicability of the "slip rule" as well as the inherent jurisdiction of the Court under rule 6906 of the Court Procedures Rules 2006 (ACT). Additionally, the Court had to consider whether the amendment of a transferred sentence under Chapter 12 of the Crimes (Sentence Administration) Act 2005 (ACT) was permissible.
The Court found that it had the inherent jurisdiction to amend its orders to correct any accidental slips or omissions. The Court noted that the original order was clearly the result of an accidental slip and that the amendment sought would correct this error without altering the substance of the sentence. The Court further held that the slip rule and its inherent jurisdiction allowed for such amendments, provided the error was clear and the amendment did not prejudice any party. The Court exercised its discretion to amend the order as requested, correcting the sentence to reflect the intended terms.
The Court ordered that the sentence in The Queen v Todd Elphick (No 2) be amended to reflect the intended terms. Specifically, the order required that the words "cumulative as to" be omitted and replaced with "concurrent as to approximately," and the date "1 October" be omitted and replaced with "21 October." These amendments were also to be reflected in paragraph [97] of the reasons for sentence.
Orders
Orders of the court
That paragraph 2 of the order of the Court in The Queen v Todd Elphick (No 2) [2015] ACTSC 23 be amended by:
(1) omitting “cumulative as to” and substituting “concurrent as to approximately”; and
(2) omitting “1 October” and substituting “21 October”
and the same amendments be made to paragraph [97] of the reasons for sentence.
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.