Starling v Ostrowski

The appellant, Starling, was convicted of consigning undersized rock lobsters and appealed the decision. The matter was heard in the Supreme Court of Queensland, where the appellant argued that the Magistrate was incorrect in holding that their belief that the lobsters were of legal size was reasonable. The central issue before the court was whether the appellant's belief was genuinely held and whether it was reasonable in the circumstances. The court considered whether the appellant took reasonable steps to ensure the legality of the lobsters and whether the appellant's belief was based on reasonable grounds. The court held that the Magistrate was correct in finding that the appellant's belief was reasonable, given the evidence presented. The court found that the appellant had taken reasonable steps to ensure the legality of the lobsters and that their belief was based on reasonable grounds. The appeal was dismissed, and the conviction was upheld. The court found that the appellant's belief was reasonable and that the conviction was just.