Skye Bianca Joyce v Craig Anthony Baird - [2013] ACTSC 79

SKYE BIANCA JOYCE v CRAIG ANTHONY BAIRD & ANOR
[2013] ACTSC 79 (3 May 2013)

APPEAL AND NEW TRIAL – appeal against conviction – failure to appear – Bench Sheets admissible under s 157 Evidence Act2011 (ACT) – appeal dismissed
APPEAL AND NEW TRIAL – appeal against conviction – failure to appear – fault element under s 49(3) Bail Act1992 (ACT) – overlooking obligation to appear does not satisfy the element of ‘reasonable excuse’ – appeal dismissed
APPEAL AND NEW TRIAL – appeal against conviction – minor theft – temporary unavailability of witness – witness deemed available – statement by witness tendered in her absence inadmissible – appeal dismissed

Bail Act1992 (ACT)
Evidence Act2011 (ACT)
Criminal Code 2002 (ACT)

McCall v Werry (unrep, 2 April 1982, NSWSC)

ON APPEAL FROM THE MAGISTRATES COURT OF THE AUSTRALIAN CAPITAL TERRITORY

No. SCA 74 of 2012

Judge: Higgins CJ
Supreme Court of the ACT

Date: 3 May 2013

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE     )
  )          No. SCA 74 of 2012
AUSTRALIAN CAPITAL TERRITORY )

ON APPEAL FROM THE MAGISTRATES COURT OF THE AUSTRALIAN CAPITAL TERRITORY

BETWEEN:SKYE BIANCA JOYCE
Appellant

AND:CRAIG ANTHONY BAIRD
First Respondent

AND:PAUL LAWRENCE REYNOLDS
Second Respondent

ORDER

Judge:  Higgins CJ
Date:  3 May 2013
Place:  Canberra

THE COURT ORDERS THAT:

The appeals be dismissed.

The matter be remitted to the learned Magistrate to impose sentence.

The appellant, Skye Bianca Joyce, has appealed from convictions for, firstly, an offence against s 49 of the Bail Act1992 (ACT) (‘Bail Act’) that provides:

(1)       A person commits an offence if the person –
(a)       gives an undertaking to appear before a court; and
(b)       fails to carry out the undertaking.

Maximum Penalty: 200 penalty units, imprisonment for 2 years or both.
(2)The court may issue a warrant to arrest the person and to bring the person before the court.
(3)Subsection (l) does not apply if the person has a reasonable excuse for failing to carry out the undertaking.

She was also charged, under s 321 of the Criminal Code 2002 (ACT) (‘the Code’) with the theft of a three piece pot set, to the value of $539.95, belonging to David Jones Ltd at Phillip in the Australian Capital Territory on 21 February 2011.

She was granted bailed to answer that latter charge when she first appeared on 23 August 2011.

Magistrate Walker released the appellant on her own recognisance to appear on 13 September 2011. She failed to appear on that date and Magistrate Doogan “forfeited bail” and directed a warrant to issue. Under s 8 of the Bail Act, the appellant was entitled to bail. Under s 28 of the Bail Act, an undertaking to appear is and was required of the appellant. Sub-section (4) provides:

A court must accept an undertaking given under this section as proof of the matters stated in it if there is no evidence to the contrary.

Section 49 of the Bail Act, referring to failure to answer…

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 Skye Bianca Joyce v Craig Anthony Baird

Details

AGLC: Skye Bianca Joyce v Craig Anthony Baird [2013] ACTSC 79
Case: [2013] ACTSC 79
Decision Date: 3 May 2013

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The appeal arose from a conviction in the Magistrates Court of the Australian Capital Territory, where Craig Anthony Baird was found guilty of theft and failing to appear. Skye Bianca Joyce, the appellant, challenged the conviction on multiple grounds, including the admissibility of Bench Sheets under the Evidence Act 2011 (ACT) and the interpretation of the fault element in the Bail Act 1992 (ACT). Joyce argued that the Bench Sheets were improperly admitted, and that the failure to appear did not meet the threshold of a reasonable excuse as required by the Bail Act.

The court had to determine whether the Bench Sheets were admissible under section 157 of the Evidence Act, whether the failure to appear met the fault element in the Bail Act, and if the absence of a witness affected the admissibility of her statement. The court found that the Bench Sheets were admissible under the Evidence Act, as they were properly authenticated and relevant to the proceedings. Regarding the fault element, the court concluded that merely overlooking the obligation to appear does not constitute a reasonable excuse under the Bail Act. Finally, the court held that the witness's temporary unavailability did not render her statement inadmissible, as she was deemed available during the trial.

The appeals were dismissed, and the matter was remitted to the Magistrate to impose sentence. The decision underscored the importance of compliance with court orders and the stringent standards required for a reasonable excuse under the Bail Act. The court's ruling on the admissibility of Bench Sheets provided clarity on the use of such records in court proceedings.

Orders

Orders of the court

1. The appeals be dismissed.

2. The matter be remitted to the learned Magistrate to impose sentence.

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.