Tay v Director of Public Prosecutions (NSW)

The applicant, Tay, sought judicial review of a decision by the District Court of New South Wales which declined to set aside a conviction for driving whilst his licence was suspended. The applicant had been convicted of two such offences. The Director of Public Prosecutions (NSW) was the respondent.

The primary legal issue before the Court of Appeal was whether the District Court had erred in law by refusing to set aside the second conviction. This involved considering whether the applicant had established a jurisdictional error on the part of the District Court. A related issue was the relevance of the basis for the suspension of the applicant's driver's licence to the determination of whether an excuse for the offence existed.

The Court of Appeal held that the District Court had not erred. It reasoned that the offence of driving whilst licence suspended was an offence of strict liability, meaning that the prosecution did not need to prove fault. While certain defences might be available, the grounds relied upon by the applicant, namely employment and business exigencies, did not constitute a recognised excuse for committing the offence. The Court further noted that the basis for the suspension of the licence was irrelevant to the question of whether an excuse for driving whilst suspended existed. No jurisdictional error was established.

The summons was dismissed, and the applicant was ordered to pay the costs of the proceedings.