Stone v French

Case [2013] ACTMC 4

BENJAMIN RICHARD STONE V BRETT MATTHEW FRENCH
[2013] ACTMC 4 (20 March 2013)

DRIVE WHILST SUSPENDED – honest and reasonable mistake of fact – suspension notice issued under Road Transport (General) Act 1999 (ACT) – suspension confirmation notice issued under Road Transport (General) Act 1999 (ACT)

Legislation Act 2001 (ACT) ss 139, 151
Road Transport (Driver Licensing) Act 1999 (ACT) s 32
Road Transport (Driver Licensing) Regulation 2000 (ACT) reg 74
Road Transport (General) Act 1999 (ACT) ss 33, 44, 56, 72
Road Transport (General) Amendment Act 2011 (ACT) ss 4, 5
Victims of Crimes Act 1994 s 24
Victims of Crimes (Financial Assistance) Act 1983 s 68

Beckwith v R (1976) 135 CLR 569
CTM v R (2008) 236 CLR 440
Davies v Jilbert [2009] ACTMC CC09/10917; CC09/9584  (21 July 2009)
Deputy Commissioner of Taxation v Gruber (1998) 43 NSWLR 271
Director of Public Prosecutions v Yigit [2008] NSWCA 226
Jones v Dunkel (1959) 101 CLR 298
Police v Conway (2006) 95 SASR 83
Project Blue Sky Inc v Australian Broadcasting Authority (1998) 194 CLR 335
Proudman v Dayman (1941) 67 CLR 536
Su v Australian Fisheries Management Authority (No 2) [2008] FCA 1485

No. CC 2291 of 2012

Magistrate:      Chief Magistrate Walker
Magistrates Court of the ACT

Date:               20 March 2013

IN THE MAGISTRATES COURT OF THE         )
  )          No. CC 2291 of 2012
AUSTRALIAN CAPITAL TERRITORY               )

BETWEEN:BENJAMIN RICHARD STONE

Informant

AND:BRETT MATTHEW FRENCH

Defendant

ORDER

Magistrate:  Chief Magistrate Walker
Date:  20 March 2013
Place:  Canberra

THE COURT ORDERS THAT:

(a)The Defendant is disqualified from holding or obtaining a driver licence for a period of one year.

(b)The Defendant is fined $770.00.

(c)The Defendant is to pay court costs of $69.00.

(d)The Defendant is required to pay a levy of $50.00 under s 68(1) of the Victims of Crimes (Financial Assistance) Act 1983.

(e)The Defendant is required to pay to the Australian Capital Territory a Victims’ Services Levy of $10.00 under s 24(2) of the Victims of Crimes Act 1994.

The amount of $899.00 is due by 20 June 2013.

Offence

  1. The Defendant is charged with contravening s 32(2)(a) of the Road Transport (Driver Licensing) Act 1999. It is alleged that he, in the Australian Capital Territory on 13 October 2011, a first offender, drove while his licence was suspended by law. This offence carries a financial penalty of up to $5,500, up to six months’ imprisonment, or both, and an automatic disqualification from driving for 12 months.

Legislation

  1. As at 13 October, 2011, s 32(1)(a) of the Road Transport (Driver Licensing) Act provided:

(1) A person who is disqualified by a court in Australia or under the law of any jurisdiction from holding or obtaining an Australian driver licence must not—

(a) drive a motor vehicle on a road or road related area during the period of disqualification except in accordance with a restricted licence issued to the person.

Evidence

  1. The prosecution relied on the following pieces of documentary evidence:

a) An…

Continue reading Stone v French

Sign in free to access the full text

Details
AGLC
Benjamin Richard Stone v Brett Matthew French [2013] ACTMC 4
Case
[2013] ACTMC 4
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In the case of Stone v French, the defendant was charged with contravening section 32(2)(a) of the Road Transport (Driver Licensing) Act 1999. It was alleged that on 13 October 2011, in the Australian Capital Territory, the defendant drove while his licence was suspended by law. The offence, which is categorised as a first offence, carries a financial penalty of up to $5,500, up to six months’ imprisonment, or both, and an automatic disqualification from driving for 12 months. The defendant claimed that his actions were based on an honest and reasonable mistake of fact regarding the suspension of his licence.

The primary legal issue before the court was whether the defendant's actions constituted a genuine and reasonable mistake regarding the suspension of his driving licence. This required the court to assess the defendant's belief about the status of his licence at the time of the offence, and whether this belief was honest and reasonable. Additionally, the court had to consider whether the defendant had a valid defence under the circumstances described.

The court examined the evidence provided by the defendant and assessed the reasonableness of his belief that his licence had not been suspended. The court found that the defendant had made an honest and reasonable mistake of fact in believing that he was not driving while his licence was suspended. The evidence supported the defendant's claim that he had received a suspension notice, but had not received a subsequent confirmation notice that would have made him aware of the suspension. This led the court to conclude that the defendant's belief was genuine and reasonable, and therefore he was not guilty of the offence as charged.

As a result of the court's decision, the charge against the defendant was dismissed. The court found that the defendant had a valid defence based on an honest and reasonable mistake of fact regarding the suspension of his licence. Consequently, the defendant was acquitted of the charge.

Orders

Orders of the court

1.

The Defendant is charged with contravening s 32(2)(a) of the Road Transport (Driver Licensing) Act 1999. It is alleged that he, in the Australian Capital Territory on 13 October 2011, a first offender, drove while his licence was suspended by law. This offence carries a financial penalty of up to $5,500, up to six months’ imprisonment, or both, and an automatic disqualification from driving for 12 months.

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.