Legal Research
Cases
Tey v Carpenter

Tey v Carpenter

Case [2012] WASCA 81 10 April 2012

No judgment structure available for this case.

Type to search within this case.

TEY -v- CARPENTER [2012] WASCA 81

Jurisdiction:	SUPREME COURT OF WESTERN AUSTRALIA	Citation No:	[2012] WASCA 81
Court:	THE COURT OF APPEAL (WA)
Case No:	CACR:164/2011	Heard:	6 MARCH 2012
Coram:	McLURE P BUSS JA	Delivered:	10/04/12
No of pages:	18	Judgment Part:	1 of 1
Result:	Application for an extension of time to file the appellant's case dismissed Application for an order for the respondent to provide disclosure of certain information dismissed
Category:	B
PDF Version

Parties:	KOK YONG TEY MICHAEL FRANCIS CARPENTER
Catchwords:	Criminal law Appeal against conviction No authority to drive a motor vehicle Application for an extension of time to file appellant's case Each of the proposed grounds of appeal without a reasonable prospect of success No satisfactory explanation for the continuing failure to file the appellant's case Application for an extension of time dismissed Application for an order for the respondent to provide disclosure of certain information dismissed
Legislation:	Nil
Case References:	Gallo v Dawson [1990] HCA 30; (1990) 64 ALJR 458 Tey v Carpenter [2011] WASC 263 Tey v Optima Financial Group Pty Ltd [2012] WADC 20 Tey v Optima Financial Group Pty Ltd [No 3] [2012] WADC 3 Tey v Plotz [2011] WASCA 194 Tey v Plotz [No 3] [2012] WASC 25

JURISDICTION : SUPREME COURT OF WESTERN AUSTRALIA TITLE OF COURT : THE COURT OF APPEAL (WA) CITATION : TEY -v- CARPENTER [2012] WASCA 81 CORAM : McLURE P

BUSS JA

HEARD : 6 MARCH 2012 DELIVERED : 10 APRIL 2012 FILE NO/S : CACR 164 of 2011 BETWEEN : KOK YONG TEY

Appellant

AND

MICHAEL FRANCIS CARPENTER

Respondent

ON APPEAL FROM:

Jurisdiction : SUPREME COURT OF WESTERN AUSTRALIA

Coram : MAZZA J

Citation : TEY -v- CARPENTER [2011] WASC 263

File No : SJA 1021 of 2011

(Page 2)

Catchwords:

Criminal law - Appeal against conviction - No authority to drive a motor vehicle - Application for an extension of time to file appellant's case - Each of the proposed grounds of appeal without a reasonable prospect of success - No satisfactory explanation for the continuing failure to file the appellant's case - Application for an extension of time dismissed - Application for an order for the respondent to provide disclosure of certain information dismissed

Legislation:

Nil

Result:

Application for an extension of time to file the appellant's case dismissed

Application for an order for the respondent to provide disclosure of certain information dismissed

Category: B

Representation:

Counsel:

Appellant : In person

Respondent : Ms C J Thatcher

Solicitors:

Appellant : In person

Respondent : State Solicitor for Western Australia

(Page 3)

Case(s) referred to in judgment(s):

Gallo v Dawson [1990] HCA 30; (1990) 64 ALJR 458
Tey v Carpenter [2011] WASC 263
Tey v Optima Financial Group Pty Ltd [2012] WADC 20
Tey v Optima Financial Group Pty Ltd [No 3] [2012] WADC 3
Tey v Plotz [2011] WASCA 194
Tey v Plotz [No 3] [2012] WASC 25

(Page 4)

1 McLURE P: I agree with Buss…

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 Tey v Carpenter

Details

AGLC: Tey v Carpenter [2012] WASCA 81
Case: [2012] WASCA 81
Decision Date: 10 APRIL 2012

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The case of Tey v Carpenter involved an appeal against a conviction for driving a motor vehicle without the requisite authority. The appellant applied for an extension of time to file their case and also sought an order for the respondent to provide certain information. The matter was heard in a relevant Australian court, which was tasked with determining the validity of the appellant's application for an extension and the appropriateness of compelling the respondent to disclose specific information.

The primary legal issues that the court had to address included whether there was a reasonable prospect of success for each of the proposed grounds of appeal and whether there was a satisfactory explanation for the appellant's failure to file their case within the stipulated time frame. Furthermore, the court had to consider whether the appellant's application for an extension of time was justified and whether there were grounds for ordering the respondent to disclose certain information.

The court found that none of the proposed grounds of appeal had a reasonable prospect of success. Additionally, the court noted that there was no satisfactory explanation provided by the appellant for their continued failure to file their case. Consequently, the court dismissed the application for an extension of time to file the appellant's case. In relation to the application for an order compelling the respondent to provide disclosure of certain information, the court also dismissed this application, finding no grounds for such an order.

In conclusion, the court dismissed both applications made by the appellant. The appellant's case was not granted an extension of time to be filed, and the respondent was not compelled to disclose the requested information. These decisions underscore the importance of timely compliance with procedural requirements and the need for a reasonable prospect of success for grounds of appeal.

Orders

Orders of the court

Application for an extension of time to file the appellant's case dismissed

Application for an order for the respondent to provide disclosure of certain information dismissed

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.

Citations

AGLC Citation

Tey v Carpenter [2012] WASCA 81

Most Recent Citation

Tey v Carpenter [No 2] [2012] WASCA 114

Cases citing this decision · 1 of 1 shown

Tey v Carpenter [No 2]
[2012] WASCA 114 Para 7

…Written reasons for decision were published on 10 April 2012. See Tey v Carpenter [2012] WASCA 81.…

View all 1 citing cases →

Cases cited in this decision · 14 of 14 shown

Tey v Optima Financial Group Pty Ltd
[2012] WADC 20

…Gallo v Dawson [1990] HCA 30; (1990) 64 ALJR 458 Tey v Carpenter [2011] WASC 263 Tey v Optima Financial Group Pty Ltd [2012] WADC 20 Tey v Optima Financial Group Pty Ltd [No 3] [2012] WADC 3 Tey v Plotz [2011] WASCA 194 Tey v Plotz [No 3] [2012] WASC 25…
Tey v Optima Financial Group Pty Ltd [No 3]
[2012] WADC 3

…0; (1990) 64 ALJR 458 Tey v Carpenter [2011] WASC 263 Tey v Optima Financial Group Pty Ltd [2012] WADC 20 Tey v Optima Financial Group Pty Ltd [No 3] [2012] WADC 3 Tey v Plotz [2011] WASCA 194 Tey v Plotz [No 3] [2012] WASC 25…
Tey v Plotz [No 3]
[2012] WASC 25

…tima Financial Group Pty Ltd [2012] WADC 20 Tey v Optima Financial Group Pty Ltd [No 3] [2012] WADC 3 Tey v Plotz [2011] WASCA 194 Tey v Plotz [No 3] [2012] WASC 25…
Tey v Carpenter
[2011] WASC 263

…Gallo v Dawson [1990] HCA 30; (1990) 64 ALJR 458 Tey v Carpenter [2011] WASC 263 Tey v Optima Financial Group Pty Ltd [2012] WADC 20 Tey v Optima Financial Group Pty Ltd [No 3] [2012] WADC 3 Tey v Plotz [2011] WASCA 194 Tey v Plotz [No 3] [2012] WASC 25…
Tey v Plotz
[2011] WASCA 194

…v Carpenter [2011] WASC 263 Tey v Optima Financial Group Pty Ltd [2012] WADC 20 Tey v Optima Financial Group Pty Ltd [No 3] [2012] WADC 3 Tey v Plotz [2011] WASCA 194 Tey v Plotz [No 3] [2012] WASC 25…
City of Gosnells v Heydon
[2010] WASC 344

…r defence. She was unable to say in argument how the amendment prejudiced her defence. In support of her argument she cited City of Gosnells v Heydon [2010] WASC 344; (2010) 178 LGERA 120. The power to amend a charge in a prosecution notice is set out in s 132 of the Criminal Procedure Act . It is a power to be ex…
The State of Western Australia v JWRL (a child)
[2010] WASCA 179

…d and should be viewed from the perspective of what is relevant or could be potentially relevant: see The State of Western Australia v JWRL (a child) [2010] WASCA 179 [59] - [61].…
Grey v The Queen
[2001] HCA 65

…hat a failure by the prosecution to disclose potentially relevant evidence to the defence can give rise to a miscarriage of justice: Grey v The Queen [2001] HCA 65; (2001) 184 ALR 593. However, the failure to provide disclosure does not automatically give rise to a miscarriage of justice.…
Gallo v Dawson
[1990] HCA 30

…Gallo v Dawson [1990] HCA 30; (1990) 64 ALJR 458 Tey v Carpenter [2011] WASC 263 Tey v Optima Financial Group Pty Ltd [2012] WADC 20 Tey v Optima Financial Group Pty Ltd [No 3] [2012] WADC 3 Tey v Plotz [2011] WASCA 194 Tey v Plotz [No 3] [2012] WASC 25…
Jess v Scott
[1986] FCA 473

…of the grant or refusal of the application for extension of time: see Avery v No 2 Public Service Appeal Board [1973] 2 NZLR 86, at 92; Jess v Scott (1986) 12 FCR 187, at 194 - 195. When the application is for an extension of time in which to file an appeal, it is always necessary to consider the prospects of the a…
Mitchelson v Mitchelson
[1979] FCA 48

…[1967] VR 871, at 872; Hughes , at 263 - 264; Mitchelson v Mitchelson (1979) 24 ALR 522, at 524. It is also necessary to bear in mind in such an application that, upon the expiry of the time for appealing, the respondent has 'a vested right to retain the judgment' unless the application is granted: Vilenius v Heineg…
[1965] 1 WLR 8
[1965] 1 WLR 8

…sfied that to refuse the application would constitute an injustice. As the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council pointed out in Ratnam v Cumarasamy [1965] 1 WLR 8 at 12; [1964] 3 All ER 933, at 935.…
[1973] 2 NZLR 86
[1973] 2 NZLR 86

…, and the consequences for the parties of the grant or refusal of the application for extension of time: see Avery v No 2 Public Service Appeal Board [1973] 2 NZLR 86, at 92; Jess v Scott (1986) 12 FCR 187, at 194 - 195. When the application is for an extension of time in which to file an appeal, it is always neces…
Vilenius v Heinegar
(1962) 36 ALJR 200

…e expiry of the time for appealing, the respondent has 'a vested right to retain the judgment' unless the application is granted: Vilenius v Heinegar (1962) 36 ALJR 200, at 201. It follows that, before the applicant can succeed in this application, there must be material upon which I can be satisfied that to refuse t…

Legislation cited in this decision · 3

Criminal Procedure Act 2004 (WA)
1 mention
Magistrates Court Act 2004 (WA)
1 mention
Road Traffic Act 1974 (WA)
1 mention