Townsville City Council v McIntyre - [2013] QCA 173

SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND

CITATION:

Townsville City Council v McIntyre [2013] QCA 173

PARTIES:

TOWNSVILLE CITY COUNCIL
(applicant)
v
McINTYRE, Phillip Ernest
(respondent)

FILE NO/S:

CA No 185 of 2012
DC No 99 of 2012

DIVISION:

Court of Appeal

PROCEEDING:

Application for Leave s 118 DCA (Criminal)

ORIGINATING COURT:

District Court at Townsville

DELIVERED ON:

9 July 2013

DELIVERED AT:

Brisbane

HEARING DATE:

29 April 2013

JUDGES:

Margaret McMurdo P and Holmes JA and Henry J
Separate reasons for judgment of each member of the Court, each concurring as to the order made

ORDER:

The application for leave to appeal is refused with costs.

CATCHWORDS:

TRAFFIC LAW – TRAFFIC REGULATION – RESTRICTIONS ON STOPPING AND PARKING – PERMISSIVE PARKING SIGNS AND PARKING FEES – where respondent’s car was parked in a metered parking space beyond the length of time for which a ticket was purchased – where the respondent convicted in the Magistrates Court of breaching s 106 of the Transport Operations (Road Use Management) Act 1995 (Qld) – where respondent appealed his conviction to the District Court – where the appeal was allowed and the complaint dismissed – where applicant seeks leave to appeal the decision of the District Court Judge – whether primary Judge correctly construed provisions of the Transport Operations (Road Use Management) Act – whether primary Judge erred in failing to dismiss the appeal or remit the matter to the Magistrates Court for determination – whether leave to appeal should be granted

District Court of Queensland Act 1967 (Qld), s 3, s 118
Justices Act 1886 (Qld), s 222, s 225
Transport Operations (Road Use Management) Act 1995 (Qld), s 101, s 102, s 103, s 105, s 106, s 107

ACI Operations v Bawden[2002] QCA 286, applied
Arnold Electrical & Data Installations Pty Ltd v Logan Area Group Apprenticeship/Traineeship Scheme Ltd[2008] QCA 100, applied
De Bortoli v Kenny (1948) 76 CLR 453; [1948] HCA 12, cited
Driclad Pty Ltd v Federal Commissioner of Taxation (1968) 121 CLR 45; [1968] HCA 91, cited
Pickering v McArthur[2005] QCA 294, applied
Smith v Ash [2011] 2 Qd R 175; [2010] QCA 112, cited

COUNSEL:

R Douglas QC for the applicant
The respondent appeared on his own behalf

SOLICITORS:

Townsville City Council for the applicant
The respondent appeared on his own behalf

MARGARET McMURDO P: I agree with Henry J that this application for leave to appeal under s 118 District Court of Queensland Act 1967 (Qld) should be refused. As Henry J has set out the relevant issues and the scheme under the Transport Operations (Road Use Management) Act 1995 (Qld)[1] ("The Act"), my reasons, which follow a different path to his Honour’s, can be briefly stated.
[1]Reprint 11L.

The magistrate convicted the respondent of a parking offence under the Act. The judge allowed the respondent’s appeal, set aside the magistrate’s orders and dismissed the complaint and summons.

I agree with Henry J’s reasons for concluding that the…

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 Townsville City Council v McIntyre

Details

AGLC: Townsville City Council v McIntyre [2013] QCA 173
Case: [2013] QCA 173
Decision Date: 9 July 2013

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The Townsville City Council sought to appeal a decision of the District Court which dismissed an appeal against a conviction of the respondent, McIntyre, for a breach of traffic law. McIntyre was found guilty of violating section 106 of the Transport Operations (Road Use Management) Act 1995 (Qld) after parking in a metered parking space for longer than the duration for which he had paid. The Council argued that the District Court erred in allowing McIntyre’s appeal against his conviction in the Magistrates Court and sought leave to appeal to the Court of Appeal.

The legal issues before the Court of Appeal included whether the primary judge correctly interpreted the provisions of the Transport Operations (Road Use Management) Act and whether the primary judge erred in allowing the appeal or in failing to remit the matter to the Magistrates Court for further determination. The central issue was the interpretation of the statutory provisions regarding permissive parking signs and the applicability of parking fees.

The Court of Appeal found that the primary judge had correctly construed the provisions of the Transport Operations (Road Use Management) Act and had not erred in allowing the appeal. The Court held that the permissive parking signs clearly indicated the time limit for parking and that the respondent’s act of parking beyond this limit was a breach of the statutory provisions. The Court also found that the primary judge did not err in dismissing the appeal and that there was no basis to remit the matter to the Magistrates Court. Consequently, the Court refused the application for leave to appeal, with costs awarded to the respondent.

The Court's final order was that the application for leave to appeal is refused with costs.

Orders

Orders of the court

The application for leave to appeal is refused with costs.

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.

CITATION:	Townsville City Council v McIntyre [2013] QCA 173
PARTIES:	TOWNSVILLE CITY COUNCIL (applicant) v McINTYRE, Phillip Ernest (respondent)
FILE NO/S:	CA No 185 of 2012 DC No 99 of 2012
DIVISION:	Court of Appeal
PROCEEDING:	Application for Leave s 118 DCA (Criminal)
ORIGINATING COURT:	District Court at Townsville
DELIVERED ON:	9 July 2013
DELIVERED AT:	Brisbane
HEARING DATE:	29 April 2013
JUDGES:	Margaret McMurdo P and Holmes JA and Henry J Separate reasons for judgment of each member of the Court, each concurring as to the order made
ORDER:	The application for leave to appeal is refused with costs.
CATCHWORDS:	TRAFFIC LAW – TRAFFIC REGULATION – RESTRICTIONS ON STOPPING AND PARKING – PERMISSIVE PARKING SIGNS AND PARKING FEES – where respondent’s car was parked in a metered parking space beyond the length of time for which a ticket was purchased – where the respondent convicted in the Magistrates Court of breaching s 106 of the Transport Operations (Road Use Management) Act 1995 (Qld) – where respondent appealed his conviction to the District Court – where the appeal was allowed and the complaint dismissed – where applicant seeks leave to appeal the decision of the District Court Judge – whether primary Judge correctly construed provisions of the Transport Operations (Road Use Management) Act – whether primary Judge erred in failing to dismiss the appeal or remit the matter to the Magistrates Court for determination – whether leave to appeal should be granted District Court of Queensland Act 1967 (Qld), s 3, s 118 Justices Act 1886 (Qld), s 222, s 225 Transport Operations (Road Use Management) Act 1995 (Qld), s 101, s 102, s 103, s 105, s 106, s 107 ACI Operations v Bawden[2002] QCA 286, applied Arnold Electrical & Data Installations Pty Ltd v Logan Area Group Apprenticeship/Traineeship Scheme Ltd[2008] QCA 100, applied De Bortoli v Kenny (1948) 76 CLR 453; [1948] HCA 12, cited Driclad Pty Ltd v Federal Commissioner of Taxation (1968) 121 CLR 45; [1968] HCA 91, cited Pickering v McArthur[2005] QCA 294, applied Smith v Ash [2011] 2 Qd R 175; [2010] QCA 112, cited
COUNSEL:	R Douglas QC for the applicant The respondent appeared on his own behalf
SOLICITORS:	Townsville City Council for the applicant The respondent appeared on his own behalf