R v Girvan

The case of R v Girvan involved the defendant, Girvan, who was charged with various criminal offences. The dispute centred on the legal validity of Girvan's election to be tried by a judge alone, given the recent amendment to the Supreme Court Act 1933 (ACT) section 68B, which had altered the conditions under which such an election could be made. The case was heard by the Supreme Court of the Australian Capital Territory.

The primary legal issue before the court was whether Girvan's right to elect a trial by judge alone was saved by the Interpretation Act 2001 (ACT) section 84, despite the subsequent amendment to the Supreme Court Act. The court had to determine if the right to elect accrued upon the filing of the indictment and if this right could be maintained notwithstanding the statutory amendment. Additionally, the court had to consider whether Girvan's election was validly made under the circumstances.

The Supreme Court held that Girvan's right to elect a trial by judge alone accrued upon the filing of the indictment, prior to the amendment of the Supreme Court Act. The court found that the term "right" in the Interpretation Act s 84 encompassed the right to elect, which was saved despite the subsequent amendment. Therefore, Girvan's election to be tried by a judge alone was validly made. The court reasoned that the statutory change did not retroactively affect the rights that had already accrued.

As a result, the court upheld the validity of Girvan's election to be tried by a judge alone, rejecting the prosecution's argument that the statutory amendment rendered the election invalid. The court's decision underscored the importance of the timing of the accrual of rights and the protective scope of the Interpretation Act in preserving such rights.