The Queen v Anzac

In the case of The Queen v Anzac, the respondent, Billy Anzac, appealed against his sentence for breaching a domestic violence order. The appeal was initiated by the Crown, contending that Anzac had been denied procedural fairness during the original sentencing process. Anzac conceded this point, leading to a re-sentencing hearing. Anzac was convicted of breaching a domestic violence order issued by Judge Austin in the Katherine Local Court on 16 March 2020. The order restrained Anzac from approaching, contacting, or remaining in the company of the protected person, LH, when under the influence of alcohol or other drugs, entering places where LH was present under similar conditions, and causing or attempting to cause harm to LH. Anzac breached this order on 1 April 2020 by consuming alcohol with LH at Grevillea Park in Katherine, resulting in his arrest. Anzac’s sentence was appealed on the basis of procedural fairness, which Anzac admitted, necessitating a re-sentencing hearing.

The legal issues before the court included the appropriate sentence for Anzac, considering the breach of the domestic violence order and the statutory framework governing such offences under the Domestic and Family Violence Act 2007. Specifically, the court had to determine whether the particular circumstances of the offence warranted a particular sentence under s 121(2) and (3) of the Act. The court also had to consider the nature and circumstances of the offence directly related to Anzac, as well as the applicability of the particular circumstances exception under s 121(3). Anzac's counsel argued that the breach was due to the consumption of alcohol with his partner, a circumstance directly related to the offence. The Crown, on the other hand, contended that the breach warranted a more stringent sentence to uphold the integrity of the domestic violence order.

The court, after considering the facts and arguments, found that Anzac's breach of the domestic violence order was directly related to the consumption of alcohol with his partner, which constituted a particular circumstance of the offence. This finding aligned with the statutory exception under s 121(3) of the Domestic and Family Violence Act 2007. The court accepted that Anzac's actions were driven by his consumption of alcohol with the victim, which constituted a particular circumstance of the offence. Consequently, the court re-sentenced Anzac to a supervised bond, taking into account the particular circumstances and the need for deterrence and rehabilitation. The re-sentencing aimed to balance the need for procedural fairness with the seriousness of the offence and the protection of the victim.