District Court
New South Wales
Medium Neutral Citation: R v Lidgard [2022] NSWDC 445 Hearing dates: 15 March, 16 March, 17 March, 18 March, 21 March, 22 March, 23 March, 24 March, 25 March, 23 May, 24 May, 25 May, 26 May, 27 May, 30 May, 31 May, 1 June, 2 June, 3 June, 6 June, 7 June, 8 June, 9 June, 29 August, 30 August, 31 August, 1 September, 2 September, 5 September 2022 Decision date: 30 September 2022 Jurisdiction: Criminal Before: Colefax SC DCJ Decision: Not guilty on Counts 1-4 inclusive
Catchwords: CRIME - judge alone trial - dangerous driving occasioning death - dangerous driving occasioning grievous bodily harm
Legislation Cited: Evidence Act 1995 (NSW) s165 and s191
Cases Cited: Jiminez v The Queen [1992] 173 CLR 572
Toohey v R [2020] NSWCCA 166
Category: Principal judgment Parties: Rex (Crown)
Brendon Paul Lidgard (Accused)Representation: Ms Knowles with Ms Hurford (Crown Prosecutors)
Mr Buchen SC with Mr Wong (Counsel for the accused)
File Number(s): 2020/00204504 Publication restriction: Statutory Non Publication orders of the names of the complainants in Counts 1 to 3 inclusive and of any other matter that might identify any of them, directly or indirectly.
-
As at 10 July 2020, Brendon Paul Lidgard was:
44 years old;
a long-term sufferer of Type 1 diabetes (since he was 17 years old);
the holder of a NSW heavy vehicle driver’s licence (since November 2009); and
employed as a professional heavy vehicle driver by Boral Transport Limited.
-
Type 1 diabetes is a condition in which the pancreas is unable to produce sufficient insulin to maintain blood glucose levels.
-
Diabetics need to take insulin to chemically replicate the physical process of producing insulin.
-
Diabetics can only access insulin through prescriptions written by either a general practitioner or the relevant medical specialist (an endocrinologist).
-
At the relevant time, the administration of insulin was effected by injection – usually by the diabetic. Commonly, a diabetic, such as Mr Lidgard, would inject himself with a fast-acting insulin dose 3 times a day (before eating breakfast, lunch and dinner); and with a slower acting dose at night. Humalog is such a fast-acting insulin dose and Lantus is such a slower acting dose.
-
It is possible for a diabetic to “split” his evening fast-acting dose and to consume part of that dose between lunch and dinner – and to reduce the dinner dose accordingly.
-
When blood sugar levels drop below “normal”, a hypoglycaemic event may occur.
-
Hypoglycaemic events can vary in severity. If very mild, there may be no detectible symptoms. If mild, symptoms may include feeling vague, palpitations, sweats, tiredness and not thinking clearly. These symptoms are easily recognised by diabetics. However, once a person has had Type 1 diabetes for approximately 15 years, it is not uncommon for that person to have hormonal changes such that he no longer has the usual (warning) symptoms of hypoglycaemia. This results in a condition called hypoglycaemic unawareness. This can cause the diabetic’s blood sugar levels to…
Continue reading R v Lidgard
Sign in free to access the full text
- AGLC
- R v Lidgard [2022] NSWDC 445
- Case
- [2022] NSWDC 445
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The court had to consider several legal issues, including the definition and elements of dangerous driving under the relevant statutes. It needed to establish whether the defendant's driving was indeed dangerous, which requires a standard of recklessness or a gross deviation from what a reasonable driver would do. Additionally, the court had to examine the causal link between the defendant's actions and the resulting harm and death. This involved scrutinising the evidence presented and determining whether the harm and death were a direct consequence of the alleged dangerous driving.
In reaching its decision, the court evaluated the evidence and testimonies presented in the trial. It concluded that the prosecution had not proven beyond reasonable doubt that the defendant's driving was dangerous and that it directly caused the death and grievous bodily harm. The court found that the evidence was insufficient to establish the necessary causal link between the defendant's actions and the resulting harm. Consequently, the defendant was acquitted on all counts related to the dangerous driving occasioning death and grievous bodily harm.
Orders
Orders of the court
Not guilty on Counts 1-4 inclusive
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.