TUANG -v- GADENNE [2015] WASC 383

Jurisdiction:	SUPREME COURT OF WESTERN AUSTRALIA	Citation No:	[2015] WASC 383
Case No:	SJA:1123/2013	Heard:	15 APRIL 2015
Coram:	JENKINS J	Delivered:	15/10/15
No of pages:	20	Judgment Part:	1 of 1
Result:	Decision made by Corboy J on 4 March 2014 to dismiss the appeal confirmed
Category:	B
PDF Version

Parties:	BOON KWANG TUANG JEFFERY MICHAEL GADENNE
Catchwords:	Criminal law Appeal Application to set aside decision made on the papers to dismiss appeal Conviction for driving without authority Appeal against conviction and sentence after plea of guilty No merits in the proposed grounds of appeal against conviction or sentence Gross failures to comply with Rules and court orders Not in the interests of justice to set aside decision made on the papers
Legislation:	Criminal Appeals Act 2004 (WA) Criminal Code (WA), s 24 Criminal Procedure Rules 2005 (WA), r 63(3), r 63(6), r 65(1), r 65(3), r 65(6), r 65(7) Fines, Penalties and Infringement Notices Enforcement Act 1994 (WA), s 5, s 19, s 43, s 101, s 101A, s 101D Road Traffic Act 1979 (WA), s 49(1)(a), s 49(3)(d)
Case References:	Aubertin v The State of Western Australia (2006) 33 WAR 87 Illich v Young [2000] WASCA 383 Meissner v The Queen (1995) 184 CLR 132 Minear v Rudrum [2001] WASCA 10 Ottobrino v Espinoza (1995) 14 WAR 373 R v Chan (1989) 38 A Crim R 337 Vella v The State of Western Australia [2006] WASCA 129 Wroblewski v Starling [1987] WAR 233

JURISDICTION : SUPREME COURT OF WESTERN AUSTRALIA

IN CRIMINAL

CITATION : TUANG -v- GADENNE [2015] WASC 383 CORAM : JENKINS J HEARD : 15 APRIL 2015 DELIVERED : 15 OCTOBER 2015 FILE NO/S : SJA 1123 of 2013 BETWEEN : BOON KWANG TUANG

Appellant

AND

JEFFERY MICHAEL GADENNE

Respondent

ON APPEAL FROM:

Jurisdiction : MAGISTRATES COURT OF WESTERN AUSTRALIA

Coram : MAGISTRATE R BROMFIELD

File No : PE 22098 of 2013

Catchwords:

Criminal law - Appeal - Application to set aside decision made on the papers to dismiss appeal - Conviction for driving without authority - Appeal against conviction and sentence after plea of guilty - No merits in the proposed grounds of appeal against conviction or sentence - Gross failures to comply with Rules and court orders - Not in the interests of justice to set aside decision made on the papers

Legislation:

Criminal Appeals Act 2004 (WA)

Criminal Code (WA), s 24
Criminal Procedure Rules 2005 (WA), r 63(3), r 63(6), r 65(1), r 65(3), r 65(6), r 65(7)
Fines, Penalties and Infringement Notices Enforcement Act 1994 (WA), s 5, s 19, s 43, s 101, s 101A, s 101D
Road Traffic Act 1979 (WA), s 49(1)(a), s 49(3)(d)

Result:

Decision made by Corboy J on 4 March 2014 to dismiss the appeal confirmed

Category: B

Representation:

Counsel:

Appellant : In person

Respondent : Ms J E Rhodes

Solicitors:

Appellant : In person

Respondent : State Solicitor for Western Australia

Case(s) referred to in judgment(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 Tuang v Gadenne

Details

AGLC: Tuang v Gadenne [2015] WASC 383
Case: [2015] WASC 383
Decision Date: 15 OCTOBER 2015

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Tuang has appealed against a conviction and sentence for driving without authority. The appeal was dismissed by Corboy J on 4 March 2014. Tuang applied to set aside the decision, arguing that the decision was made without proper consideration of the merits of the appeal. The court was required to determine whether the decision to dismiss the appeal should be set aside.
The court found that there were no merits to the proposed grounds of appeal against the conviction or sentence. The appeal was dismissed because of gross failures to comply with the rules and court orders. The court concluded that it was not in the interests of justice to set aside the decision made on the papers. The court confirmed the decision made by Corboy J to dismiss the appeal.

Orders

Orders of the court

Decision made by Corboy J on 4 March 2014 to dismiss the appeal confirmed

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.