TEY -v- PLOTZ [No 3] [2012] WASC 25

Jurisdiction:	SUPREME COURT OF WESTERN AUSTRALIA	Citation No:	[2012] WASC 25
Case No:	SJA:1139/2009	Heard:	12 JANUARY 2012
Coram:	HALL J	Delivered:	12/01/12
No of pages:	9	Judgment Part:	1 of 1
Result:	Applications dismissed
Category:	B
PDF Version

Parties:	KOK YONG TEY MARTIN DANIEL PLOTZ MICHAEL FRANCIS CARPENTER WA POLICE
Catchwords:	Criminal appeals Costs Applications for stay of costs orders pending further appeals Whether power to order stays Whether power to make suspension orders under Civil Judgments Enforcement Act 2004 (WA)
Legislation:	Civil Judgments Enforcement Act 2004 (WA), s 15 Criminal Appeals Act 2004 (WA), s 12, s 14, s 21
Case References:	Canberra Residential Developments Pty Ltd v Brendas [2010] FCA 519 Cristovao v Butcher Paull & Calder [No 3] [2011] WASCA 10 Eastland Technology Australia Pty Ltd v Whisson [2003] WASCA 307; (2003) 28 WAR 308 Spiers Earthworks Pty Ltd v Landtec Projects Corporation Pty Ltd [2010] WASCA 226 Tey v Carpenter [2011] WASC 263 Tey v Plotz [2011] WASCA 194 Tey v Plotz [No 2] [2011] WASC 34

JURISDICTION : SUPREME COURT OF WESTERN AUSTRALIA

IN CRIMINAL

CITATION : TEY -v- PLOTZ [No 3] [2012] WASC 25 CORAM : HALL J HEARD : 12 JANUARY 2012 DELIVERED : 12 JANUARY 2012 FILE NO/S : SJA 1139 of 2009 BETWEEN : KOK YONG TEY

Appellant

AND

MARTIN DANIEL PLOTZ

Respondent

FILE NO/S : SJA 1021 of 2011 BETWEEN : KOK YONG TEY

Appellant

AND

MICHAEL FRANCIS CARPENTER

Respondent

FILE NO/S : SJA 1033 of 2010 BETWEEN : KOK YONG TEY

Appellant

AND

WA POLICE

Respondent

(Page 2)

ON APPEAL FROM:

For File No : SJA 1139 of 2009

Jurisdiction : MAGISTRATES COURT OF WESTERN AUSTRALIA

Coram : MAGISTRATE LANE

File No : PE 41286 of 2009

For File No : SJA 1021 of 2011

Jurisdiction : MAGISTRATES COURT OF WESTERN AUSTRALIA

Coram : MAGISTRATE LAWRENCE

File No : FR 1449 of 2010

For File No : SJA 1033 of 2010

Jurisdiction : MAGISTRATES COURT OF WESTERN AUSTRALIA

Coram : MAGISTRATE LANE

File No : PE 41286 of 2009

Catchwords:

Criminal appeals - Costs - Applications for stay of costs orders pending further appeals - Whether power to order stays - Whether power to make suspension orders under Civil Judgments Enforcement Act 2004 (WA)

Legislation:

Civil Judgments Enforcement Act 2004 (WA), s 15

Criminal Appeals Act 2004 (WA), s 12, s 14, s 21

Result:

Applications dismissed

(Page 3)

Category: B

Representation:

SJA 1139 of 2009

Counsel:

Appellant : In person

Respondent : Mr N T L John

Solicitors:

Appellant : In person

Respondent : State Solicitor for Western Australia

SJA 1021 of 2011

Counsel:

Appellant : In person

Respondent : Mr N T L John

Solicitors:

Appellant : In person

Respondent : State Solicitor for Western Australia

SJA 1033 of 2010

Counsel:

Appellant : In person

Respondent : Mr N T L John

Solicitors:

Appellant : In person

Respondent : State Solicitor for Western Australia

(Page 4)

Case(s)…

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 Plotz [No 3]

Details

AGLC: Tey v Plotz [No 3] [2012] WASC 25
Case: [2012] WASC 25
Decision Date: 12 JANUARY 2012

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The appeal in Tey v Plotz [No 3] involved the appellant, Tey, seeking a stay of costs orders that had been made against him in previous proceedings. The dispute arose out of an earlier criminal matter in which Tey was convicted and ordered to pay costs. Tey now sought to stay these costs pending further appeals, arguing that such stays are permissible under the Civil Judgments Enforcement Act 2004 (WA). The court was tasked with determining whether it had the authority to grant such a stay and whether it could make suspension orders under the relevant act.

The central legal issues before the court were whether the Supreme Court of Western Australia had the jurisdiction to order stays of costs pending further appeals and whether it could make suspension orders under the Civil Judgments Enforcement Act 2004 (WA). The court considered the statutory framework, the principles of judicial economy, and the balance of convenience in making its determination.

The court held that it did not have the power to order stays of costs pending further appeals, as this would effectively allow a party to avoid the consequences of a final judgment until all appeals were concluded. The court further held that the power to make suspension orders under the Civil Judgments Enforcement Act 2004 (WA) did not extend to costs orders in criminal matters. The court emphasised the importance of finality in criminal proceedings and the need to uphold the integrity of the judicial process.

Consequently, the court dismissed Tey's applications for stays of costs orders pending further appeals. This decision underscored the principle that costs orders in criminal cases are final and should be enforced unless overturned on appeal, thereby maintaining the balance between the rights of the parties and the finality of criminal judgments.

Orders

Orders of the court

Applications 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.