Roads and Traffic Authority of NSW v Higginson

The Roads and Traffic Authority of NSW (the RTA) sought judicial review of orders made by a District Court judge concerning a period of disqualification from holding a driver's licence. The RTA was not a party to the original criminal proceedings in the Local Court or the subsequent appeal to the District Court. The RTA contended that the District Court judge had made a jurisdictional error in calculating the period of disqualification.

The Court of Appeal was required to determine whether the RTA had standing to seek judicial review of the District Court's orders, given it was not a party to the proceedings below. It also had to consider the proper interpretation of conflicting provisions within the *Road Transport (General) Act 2005* and the *Crimes (Appeal and Review) Act 2001* (NSW) regarding the calculation of licence disqualification periods, and whether the District Court judge's order constituted a jurisdictional error.

The Court held that the Supreme Court possessed broad standing under section 69 of the *Supreme Court Act 1970* to grant orders of certiorari and declarations, even in the absence of a direct party interest, where the public interest warranted it. However, it found that the District Court judge's order, which specified a termination date for the disqualification, was an error. The Court reasoned that the relevant provisions of the *Road Transport (General) Act 2005* and the *Crimes (Appeal and Review) Act 2001* could be read together, and that the specific provision in the *Road Transport (General) Act 2005* should prevail. The judge's attempt to specify a termination date, rather than simply imposing the disqualification period, was considered a jurisdictional error.

The Court of Appeal ordered that so much of the District Court judge's disqualification order as specified the date of termination of the disqualification, namely the words "to 7 June 2011", be set aside. The summons was otherwise dismissed, and the RTA was ordered to pay the first respondent's costs.