Legal Research
Cases
Ryan v Dimitrovski

Ryan v Dimitrovski

Case [2000] WASCA 116 4 May 2000

No judgment structure available for this case.

Type to search within this case.

RYAN -v- DIMITROVSKI & ANOR [2000] WASCA 116

Jurisdiction:	SUPREME COURT OF WESTERN AUSTRALIA	Citation No:	[2000] WASCA 116
Case No:	SJA:1003/2000	Heard:	18 APRIL 2000
Coram:	SCOTT J	Delivered:	4/05/00
No of pages:	9	Judgment Part:	1 of 1
Result:	Application for leave to appeal refused
PDF Version

Parties:	ALEXANDER PATRICK RYAN GEORGE DIMITROVSKI MARGARET MARSHALL DIMITROVSKI
Catchwords:	Application for leave to appeal Property reasonably suspected of being stolen or unlawfully obtained No case submission Special leave to appeal to High Court refused Remitted to Magistrate Magistrate dismissed charges Justices Act 1902 s 187(1) Magistrate made appropriate findings of fact and adequately set out the evidence Interests of justice not served by further delay No arguable case Respondents facing serious financial difficulties as a result of length and cost of prosecution Application dismissed
Legislation:	Justices Act 1902, s 187(1)
Case References:	Pallot v Harrison, unreported; SCt of WA (Owen J); Library No 950261; 12 May 1995 Brunskill v Sovereign Marine (1985) 62 ALR 53 Cotton v Walker, unreported; SCt of WA (Scott J); Library No 930628; 19 November 1993 Devries v Australian National Railways Commission (1973) 177 CLR 472 Housing Commission of New South Wales v Tatmar Pastoral Co Pty Ltd [1983] NSWLR 378 Jones v Hyde (1989) 85 ALR 23 Motor Vehicle Insurance Trust v Tretjak, unreported; FCt SCt of WA; Library No 7596; 13 April 1989 Soulemezis v Dudley Holdings Pty Ltd (1987) 10 NSWLR 247 State Rail Authority of New South Wales v Earthline Constructions Pty Ltd [1999] HCA 3; (1999) 73 ALJR 306 Stojkovski v Fitzgerald [1989] WAR 328

JURISDICTION : SUPREME COURT OF WESTERN AUSTRALIA

IN CHAMBERS

CITATION : RYAN -v- DIMITROVSKI & ANOR [2000] WASCA 116 CORAM : SCOTT J HEARD : 18 APRIL 2000 DELIVERED : 4 MAY 2000 FILE NO/S : SJA 1003 of 2000 BETWEEN : ALEXANDER PATRICK RYAN

Applicant

AND

GEORGE DIMITROVSKI

First Respondent

MARGARET MARSHALL DIMITROVSKI

Second Respondent

Catchwords:

Application for leave to appeal - Property reasonably suspected of being stolen or unlawfully obtained - No case submission - Special leave to appeal to High Court refused - Remitted to Magistrate - Magistrate dismissed charges - Justices Act 1902 s 187(1) - Magistrate made appropriate findings of fact and adequately set out the evidence - Interests of justice not served by further delay - No arguable case - Respondents facing serious financial difficulties as a result of length and cost of prosecution - Application dismissed

Legislation:

Justices Act 1902, s 187(1)

(Page 2)

Result:

Application for leave to appeal refused

Representation:

Counsel:

Applicant : Mr J A Thomson

First Respondent : Mr R W Bower

Second Respondent : Mr R W Bower

Solicitors:

Applicant : State Crown Solicitor

First Respondent : Corsers

Second Respondent : Corsers

Case(s) referred to in judgment(s):

Pallot v Harrison, unreported; SCt of WA (Owen J); Library No 950261; 12 May 1995

Case(s) also cited:

Brunskill v Sovereign Marine (1985) 62 ALR 53
Cotton v Walker, unreported; SCt of WA (Scott J);…

Grounds of appeal

[14] The appellant contends that the primary judge erred in finding that the respondent had discharged the onus of establishing the matters required under the relevant provision.

[15] It was submitted that his Honour failed to give adequate weight to the evidence of the second witness, and that the findings of fact were not reasonably open on the material before the Court.

[16] The respondent, for its part, submits that no error is disclosed, and that the conclusions reached were well within the range of outcomes available to the primary judge.

Consideration

[17] It is convenient to deal first with the question of construction, as the resolution of that issue informs the remaining grounds advanced by the appellant.

[18] For the reasons that follow, we are of the view that the appeal should be allowed in part and the matter remitted for further determination.

Continue reading Ryan v Dimitrovski

Details

AGLC: Ryan v Dimitrovski [2000] WASCA 116
Case: [2000] WASCA 116
Decision Date: 4 MAY 2000

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The applicant sought special leave to appeal against a decision of the Court of Appeal of the Supreme Court of New South Wales, which had dismissed an appeal against a decision of a Magistrate. The matter involved the applicant’s conviction for possession of property reasonably suspected of being stolen or unlawfully obtained. The applicant's application for leave to appeal was grounded on the assertion that the Magistrate had made an error in fact or law. The respondents, who were facing serious financial difficulties due to the length and cost of the prosecution, opposed the application.

The primary legal issue before the Court was whether the application for leave to appeal presented an arguable case. The Court considered whether the applicant had demonstrated that the Court of Appeal had made an error of law or fact that warranted the intervention of the High Court. The Court also assessed whether the interests of justice were served by allowing an appeal or if further delay would be detrimental.

The Court found that the Magistrate had made appropriate findings of fact and adequately set out the evidence. The Court of Appeal had correctly considered the evidence and applied the relevant legal principles. Given the serious financial difficulties faced by the respondents, the Court concluded that the interests of justice were not served by allowing an appeal. Consequently, the application for leave to appeal was dismissed.

The application for leave to appeal was dismissed, and the case was remitted to the Magistrate. The original charges against the applicant were dismissed by the Magistrate.

Orders

Orders of the court

Application for leave to appeal refused

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.

Citations

AGLC Citation

Ryan v Dimitrovski [2000] WASCA 116

Most Recent Citation

Kasprzyck v Chief of Army [2001] ADFDAT 5

Cases citing this decision · 15 of 15 shown

Safari v Director of Public Prosecutions for Western Australia
[2023] WASC 389 Para 9

…able suspicion must still be directed to the point in time at which it is alleged the accused was in possession of the thing. [12] Ryan v Dimitrovski (1996) 16 WAR 457, 476.…
The State of Western Australia v Zuideveld
[2023] WADC 91 Para 2

…e offence, that the investigating officer had a reasonable suspicion at the time he arrested the accused or seized the thing. [19] Ryan v Dimitrovski (1996) 16 WAR 457 (Steytler J (as he was then)); and Hoskins v Ramsden [2008] WASC 28 [14] - [16]; McLennan v Campbell [2003] WASCA 145 [27] .…
Re AW
[2022] WADC 96 Para 14

…kept, even if they are not aware of its precise location and even if they need the assistance of another to have access to it (see Ryan v Dimitrovski (1996) 16 WAR 457 at 460, 462). What is required in each case is 'sufficient knowledge' of the item (see Williams v The Queen (1978) 140 CLR 591 at 610), together with…
Welch v Dao
[2019] WASC 115 Para 3

…d that the test is not whether the police or the complainant had the relevant suspicion at the time of seizure or arrest.[36] [36] Ryan v Dimitrovski (1996) 16 WAR 457 (Malcolm CJ, Rowland & Steytler JJ); McLennan v Campbell (Pullin J).…
Le v Feakes
[2018] WASC 331 Para 8

…necessarily fall short of certainty. The section does not require any certainty greater than suspicion to be established.[32] [31] Ryan v Dimitrovski (1996) 16 WAR 457, 478 (Steytler P; Malcolm CJ agreeing); McLennan v Campbell [2003] WASCA 145 [27] - [28]. [32] Hoskins v Ramsden [No 2] [2009] WASCA 90; (2009) 196 A…
Whittle v Brown
[2011] WASC 143 Para 1

…onclusion on the evidence as to whether or not the computers might reasonably be suspected of being stolen or unlawfully obtained: Ryan v Dimitrovski (1996) 16 WAR 457; McLennan v Campbell [2003] WASCA 145. Her Honour noted that the test was not whether the police, at the time of seizure, had the relevant suspicion.…
Hamilton v The State of Western Australia
[2010] WASCA 7 Para 8

…kept, even if they are not aware of its precise location and even if they need the assistance of another to have access to it (see Ryan v Dimitrovski (1996) 16 WAR 457 at 460, 462). What is required in each case is "sufficient knowledge" of the item (see Williams v The Queen (1978) 140 CLR 591 at 610), together with…
Marzano v Procopis
[2009] WASC 332 Para 4

…In Ryan v Dimitrovski (1996) 16 WAR 457, dealing with the former statutory provision, Steytler J held that the suspicion must be held by the court at the time of the prosecution. Counsel for the applicant and for the respondent accepted that it is still the position under the present s 428. Even if this is proved, h…
Hoskins v Ramsden
[2008] WASCA 139 Para 9

…n of the evidence of witnesses who identify property in the possession of another as property stolen from them. By way of example, Ryan v Dimitrovski (1996) 16 WAR 457 makes no mention of the issue of corroboration or the requirement for it. The case was concerned with the question whether the respondents had some m…
Hoskins v Ramsden
[2008] WASC 28

…ion from the evidence led as to whether or not the goods might reasonably be suspected of being stolen or unlawfully obtained (see Ryan v Dimitrovski (1996) 16 WAR 457 and McLennan v Campbell [2003] WASCA 145). It is not whether the police at the time of the seizure of the goods had the relevant suspicion.…
Wessling v Police
[2004] SASC 72 Para 1

…e authorities. There is a detailed consideration of the time for suspicion in the context of s 69 of the Police Act 1892 (WA) in Ryan v Dimitrovski (1996) 16 WAR 457 per Steytler J at 471-476, but the legislation under consideration was in quite different terms, and the discussion is of no direct assistance. A limit…
McLennan v Campbell
[2003] WASCA 145

…4 O'Brien v Reitze [1972] WAR 152 R v Chan (1992) 28 NSWLR 421 R v Grace (1930) 30 SR (NSW) 158 Raynal v Samuels (1974) 9 SASR 264 Ryan v Dimitrovski (1996) 16 WAR 457 Simpson v Correia (1995) 13 WAR 5 Wicks v Marsh; Ex parte Wicks [1993] 2 Qd R 583 English v The Queen (1989) 17 NSWLR 149 Warren v Coombes (1979) 142…
Nelson v Haynes
[2003] WASCA 73

…zaddin (1999) 109 A Crim R 474 R v McHugh (1977) 64 Cr App Rep 92 R v Mitchell (1977) 65 Cr App Rep 185 R v Pickford [1995] QB 203 Ryan v Dimitrovski [2000] WASCA 116 Ryll v The Queen [2001] WASCA 185 Victorian Stevedoring and General Contracting Co Pty Ltd v Dignan (1931) 46 CLR 73 Wearne v Roberts [2001] WASCA 27…
Winwood v McLaughlin
[2001] TASSC 123 Para 1

…supra) at 6. In an appropriate case, this proposition will need to be reviewed in the light of the view expressed by Gaudron, Gummow, and Hayne JJ in Dimitrovski v Ryan (1998) 72 ALJR 1172, that the preferable construction of the Police Act 1892 (WA), s69, is that the words "may be reasonably suspected" required reasonable…
Kasprzyck v Chief of Army
[2001] ADFDAT 5 Para 8

…that the time to be looked at for the formation of suspicion was the time when the accused was found in possession of property. In Ryan v Dimitrovski (1996) 16 WAR 457 at 471 - 476, the Full Court of the Supreme Court of Western Australia held that the relevant time at which the grounds for suspicion must exist is t…

View all 15 citing cases →

Cases cited in this decision · 6 of 6 shown

State Rail Authority of New South Wales v Earthline Constructions Pty Ltd (In Liq)
[1999] HCA 3

…596; 13 April 1989 Soulemezis v Dudley Holdings Pty Ltd (1987) 10 NSWLR 247 State Rail Authority of New South Wales v Earthline Constructions Pty Ltd [1999] HCA 3; (1999) 73 ALJR 306 Stojkovski v Fitzgerald [1989] WAR 328…
DeVries v Australian National Railways Commission
[1993] HCA 78

…0261; 12 May 1995 Brunskill v Sovereign Marine (1985) 62 ALR 53 Cotton v Walker, unreported; SCt of WA (Scott J); Library No 930628; 19 November 1993 Devries v Australian National Railways Commission (1973) 177 CLR 472 Housing Commission of New South Wales v Tatmar Pastoral Co Pty Ltd [1983] NSWLR 378 Jones v Hyde (1989) 85 ALR 23 Motor Vehicle Insurance…
Jones v Hyde
[1989] HCA 20

…ries v Australian National Railways Commission (1973) 177 CLR 472 Housing Commission of New South Wales v Tatmar Pastoral Co Pty Ltd [1983] NSWLR 378 Jones v Hyde (1989) 85 ALR 23 Motor Vehicle Insurance Trust v Tretjak, unreported; FCt SCt of WA; Library No 7596; 13 April 1989 Soulemezis v Dudley Holdings Pty Ltd (19…
Brunskill v Sovereign Marine & General Insurance Co Ltd
[1985] HCA 61

…Pallot v Harrison, unreported; SCt of WA (Owen J); Library No 950261; 12 May 1995 Brunskill v Sovereign Marine (1985) 62 ALR 53 Cotton v Walker, unreported; SCt of WA (Scott J); Library No 930628; 19 November 1993 Devries v Australian National Railways Commission (1973) 177 CLR 472 Housing Commission of New South W…
Soulemezis v Dudley Holdings Pty Limited
110 ER 518

…Ltd [1983] NSWLR 378 Jones v Hyde (1989) 85 ALR 23 Motor Vehicle Insurance Trust v Tretjak, unreported; FCt SCt of WA; Library No 7596; 13 April 1989 Soulemezis v Dudley Holdings Pty Ltd (1987) 10 NSWLR 247 State Rail Authority of New South Wales v Earthline Constructions Pty Ltd [1999] HCA 3; (1999) 73 ALJR 306 Stojkovski v Fitzgerald [1989…
(1985) 2 NZLR 231
(1985) 2 NZLR 231

…he credibility of witnesses is involved and key evidence is definitely accepted or rejected it will almost always be advisable to say so: R v Connell (1985) 2 NZLR 231 at 237."…

Legislation cited in this decision · 1

Justices Act 1902 (NSW)
187(1), 187(1)) 2 mentions