Shires v Edwards

Case [2011] ACTSC 132

SAMUEL JAMES SHIRES v PAUL JEFFREY EDWARDS
[2011] ACTSC 132 (24 August 2011)

APPEAL AND NEW TRIAL – appeal from Magistrates Court – drink-driving offence – challenge to period of licence disqualification – appeal allowed.

APPEAL AND NEW TRIAL – appeal from Magistrates Court – fresh evidence – details of other cases – method of adducing such material.

TRAFFIC LAW – licensing of drivers – disqualification of licence – effect of appeal.

TRAFFIC LAW – licensing of drivers – disqualification of licence – principles applicable to determination of period of disqualification.

Road Transport (Alcohol and Drugs) Act 1977 (ACT), ss 4E, 7, 19, 26, 32, 41
Legislation Act 2001 (ACT)), s 133
Magistrates Court Act1930 (ACT), ss 209, 216, Div 3.10.2
Crimes (Sentencing) Act2005 (ACT), s 33

Maxwell v The Queen (1996) 184 CLR 501
Cooper v Corvisy (No 2) (2010) 5 ACTLR 151
R v Eisenach [2011] ACTCA 2
House v The King (1936) 55 CLR 499
Scott v Wynants (2009) 4 ACTLR 13
Hammond v Road Transport Authority and Anor [2006] ACTSC 125
Morris v East (1988) 83 ACTR 1
Kennewell v Rand [2006] ACTCA 10
Hughes v Grieve [2006] ACTSC 92
High v Willis (2008) 2 ACTLR 104
Scott v Wynants [2009] ACTSC 62
McGregor v Maguire [2008] ACTSC 7
Reynders v Wynants [2008] ACTSC 143
Barac v Thexton [2008] ACTSC 137
Application by the Attorney-General under section 37 of the Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act for a Guideline Judgment concerning the offence of High Range Prescribed Concentration of Alcohol under section 9(4) of the Road Transport (Safety and Traffic Management) Act 1999 (No 3 of 2002) (2004) 61 NSWLR 305
Travini v Starczewski (2009) 169 ACTR 1
Hawkins v Hawkins (2009) 3 ACTLR 210
R v Campbell [2010] ACTCA 20
R v Bloomfield (1998) 44 NSWLR 734
Heine v The Queen [2008] NSWCCA 61
R v So [2004] NSWCCA 362
Goundar v Goddard (2010) 240 FLR 176

ON APPEAL FROM THE MAGISTRATES COURT OF THE AUSTRALIAN CAPITAL TERRITORY

No. SCA 41 of 2009

Judge:             Refshauge ACJ
Supreme Court of the ACT

Date:              24 August 2011

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE     )
  )          No. SCA 41 of 2009
AUSTRALIAN CAPITAL TERRITORY )          

ON APPEAL FROM THE MAGISTRATES COURT OF THE AUSTRALIAN CAPITAL TERRITORY

SAMUEL JAMES SHIRES

Appellant

v

PAUL JEFFREY EDWARDS

Respondent

ORDER

Judge:  Refshauge ACJ
Date:  24 August 2011
Place:  Canberra

THE COURT ORDERS THAT:

  1. The appellant have leave to amend the Notice of Appeal by adding a ground of appeal as follows:

(e)       the Learned Magistrate erred in taking into account an irrelevant consideration, namely that the appellant did not need his licence for his employment.

  1. The appeal is allowed.

  1. The order of the Magistrates Court that the period during which Samuel James Shires is disqualified from holding a driver’s licence be reduced to two years is set aside.

  1. In lieu, the period during which Samuel James Shires is disqualified from holding a driver’s licence is reduced to nine months which expired on…

Continue reading Shires v Edwards

Sign in free to access the full text

Details
AGLC
Shires v Edwards [2011] ACTSC 132
Case
[2011] ACTSC 132
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In the matter of Shires v Edwards, the appellant, Samuel James Shires, appealed against a decision made by the Magistrates Court regarding his disqualification from holding a driver’s licence. The original decision, rendered on 14 January 2009, imposed a disqualification period following a drink-driving offence. Shires sought to challenge the length of his licence disqualification, arguing that it was excessive. The court was required to determine whether the Magistrates Court had erred in its assessment of the appropriate disqualification period.

The primary legal issue before the court was whether the Magistrates Court had correctly determined the period of licence disqualification for the appellant. The court also had to consider whether the Magistrate had taken into account an irrelevant consideration when making the original decision, specifically whether Shires' employment did not require a driver's licence. Additionally, the court needed to address whether the method employed to introduce fresh evidence about other similar cases was appropriate.

The court found that the Magistrate had indeed erred by considering an irrelevant factor when determining the length of the disqualification period. The court noted that the Magistrate’s consideration of Shires' employment status was not pertinent to the legal principles governing licence disqualification. Moreover, the court concluded that the fresh evidence provided by Shires was properly admitted and relevant to the matter at hand. Given these findings, the appeal was allowed, and the original disqualification period was reduced from two years to nine months, which had already expired by the time of the appeal decision. The conviction and other orders of the Magistrates Court were confirmed.

Orders

Orders of the court

1. The appellant have leave to amend the Notice of Appeal by adding a ground of appeal as follows:

the Learned Magistrate erred in taking into account an irrelevant consideration, namely that the appellant did not need his licence for his employment.

2. The appeal is allowed.

3. The order of the Magistrates Court that the period during which Samuel James Shires is disqualified from holding a driver’s licence be reduced to two years is set aside.

4. In lieu, the period during which Samuel James Shires is disqualified from holding a driver’s licence is reduced to nine months which expired on 13 October 2009.

5. The conviction and other orders of the Magistrates Court on 14 January 2009 are confirmed.

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.