RLG -v- DONNELLY [2012] WASC 230
| SUPREME COURT OF WESTERN AUSTRALIA | Citation No: | [2012] WASC 230 | |
| Case No: | SJA:1006/2012 | 21 JUNE 2012 | |
| Coram: | BEECH J | 29/06/12 | |
| 20 | Judgment Part: | 1 of 1 | |
| Result: | Leave to appeal granted on grounds 2 and 3 Appeal dismissed | ||
| D | |||
| PDF Version |
JURISDICTION : SUPREME COURT OF WESTERN AUSTRALIA
- IN CRIMINAL
- Appellant
AND
MICHAEL DONNELLY
Respondent
ON APPEAL FROM:
Jurisdiction : MAGISTRATES COURT OF WESTERN AUSTRALIA
Coram : MAGISTRATE T HALL
File No : PE 46949 of 2011, PE 46950 of 2011
Catchwords:
Criminal law and sentencing - Discharge without conviction - Offence of providing false or misleading information in a passport application - Whether magistrate erred in refusing to make an order discharging the offender without conviction - Turns on own facts
(Page 2)
Legislation:
Australian Passports Act 2005 (Cth), s 11, s 30(1)
Crimes Act 1914 (Cth), s 16A, s 19B
Result:
Leave to appeal granted on grounds 2 and 3
Appeal dismissed
Category: D
Representation:
Counsel:
Appellant : Mr L M Levy SC
Respondent : Ms S J Oliver
Solicitors:
Appellant : Michael Tudori & Associates
Respondent : Director of Public Prosecutions (Cth)
Case(s) referred to in judgment(s):
Brewer v Bayens [2002] WASCA 271; (2002) 26 WAR 510
CJ v The State of Western Australia [2009] WASCA 42
Cobiac v Liddy (1969) 119 CLR 257
Commissioner of Taxation v Baffsky [2001] NSWCCA 332; (2001) 122 A Crim R 568
DPP (Cth) v Maroney [2009] VSC 584
Ennis v D'Andrilli [2007] WASC 263
Kelton v Uren (1981) 27 SASR 92
Lanham v Brake (1983) 34 SASR 578
Law v The State of Western Australia…
Continue reading RLG v Donnelly
Sign in free to access the full text
Details
- AGLC
- RLG v Donnelly [2012] WASC 230
- Case
- [2012] WASC 230
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The case before the court involved an appeal by the respondent, Donnelly, against a decision of a magistrate who refused to make an order discharging him without conviction for an offence of providing false or misleading information in a passport application. The respondent had pleaded guilty to the offence, which was contrary to section 130 of the Migration Act 1958 (Cth). The primary focus of the appeal was the magistrate's refusal to discharge Donnelly without conviction, a matter which was argued to have been improperly exercised by the magistrate.
The legal issues before the court included whether the magistrate had erred in refusing to make an order discharging Donnelly without conviction, and whether the decision turned on its own facts. The respondent argued that the magistrate had not properly considered the relevant statutory provisions and principles, and that the decision was not in accordance with the law. The appellant, represented by the Commonwealth Director of Public Prosecutions, contended that the decision was appropriate and that the magistrate had considered all relevant factors.
In considering the appeal, the court noted that the decision to discharge without conviction was a matter of judicial discretion, but that the decision must be in accordance with the law and must take into account all relevant considerations. The court found that the magistrate had considered the relevant statutory provisions and principles, and had given appropriate weight to the seriousness of the offence and the respondent's guilty plea. The court held that the decision did not turn on its own facts, and that there was no error of law. Accordingly, the appeal was dismissed and leave to appeal was refused.
The legal issues before the court included whether the magistrate had erred in refusing to make an order discharging Donnelly without conviction, and whether the decision turned on its own facts. The respondent argued that the magistrate had not properly considered the relevant statutory provisions and principles, and that the decision was not in accordance with the law. The appellant, represented by the Commonwealth Director of Public Prosecutions, contended that the decision was appropriate and that the magistrate had considered all relevant factors.
In considering the appeal, the court noted that the decision to discharge without conviction was a matter of judicial discretion, but that the decision must be in accordance with the law and must take into account all relevant considerations. The court found that the magistrate had considered the relevant statutory provisions and principles, and had given appropriate weight to the seriousness of the offence and the respondent's guilty plea. The court held that the decision did not turn on its own facts, and that there was no error of law. Accordingly, the appeal was dismissed and leave to appeal was refused.
Orders
Orders of the court
Leave to appeal granted on grounds 2 and 3
Appeal dismissed
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.