Tulloch v The Queen

SUPREME COURT OF VICTORIA

COURT OF APPEAL

S APCR 2011 0087

SHAUN WAYNE TULLOCH	Applicant
	v
THE QUEEN	Respondent

---

JUDGES	WEINBERG and HANSEN JJA and LASRY AJA
WHERE HELD	MELBOURNE
DATE OF HEARING	14 June 2011
DATE OF JUDGMENT	14 June 2011
MEDIUM NEUTRAL CITATION	[2011] VSCA 174
JUDGMENT APPEALED FROM	R v Tulloch (Unreported, County Court of Victoria, Judge Chettle, 8 February 2011)

---

CRIMINAL LAW – Appeal – Conviction – Proceedings for breach of community-based order commenced after expiry of statutory limitation period – Sentencing Act 1991 s 47(1A) – Appeal allowed – Verdict of acquittal entered

---

Appearances:	Counsel	Solicitors
For the Applicant	Mr S C Holt with Mr P Smallwood	Victoria Legal Aid
For the Respondent	Mr B Sonnet	Mr C Hyland, Solicitor for Public Prosecutions

THE COURT:

On 19 April 2005, the applicant pleaded guilty in the County Court at Melbourne to a series of offences, including criminal damage, attempted theft, and burglary. He admitted a number of prior convictions. He was given a 12 month community-based order. In May and June 2005, he repeatedly breached the terms of that order.

On 8 December 2008, the applicant appeared before the same judge on a charge of breaching that community-based order. The charge was found proved, but no further order was made. The community-based order was, in effect, confirmed.

The applicant was subsequently formally charged with the 2005 breaches in January 2011. On 8 February 2011, he was again brought before the judge who had originally imposed the community-based order, and dealt with for those 2005 breaches, they being the same breaches that led to the December 2008 proceeding. On this occasion, however, the applicant was convicted and sentenced in relation to the original counts, to a term of three months’ imprisonment, wholly suspended for a period of 12 months.

Regrettably, both the judge and the prosecutor overlooked the fact that s 47(1A) of the Sentencing Act 1991 requires that proceedings for breach of a community-based order be commenced within three years after the date on which the offence is alleged to have been committed. In the present case, that did not occur. The conviction cannot be allowed to stand. The appeal must be allowed, and a judgment and verdict of acquittal entered.

- - - - -

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The case of Tulloch v The Queen involves an appeal by the defendant against his conviction for breach of a community-based order. The defendant was initially convicted for an offence under the Sentencing Act 1991 and subsequently found to have breached a community-based order. The crux of the appeal lies in the timing of the proceedings for the breach, which were initiated after the statutory limitation period had expired. The High Court of Australia was tasked with determining whether the trial judge had the authority to proceed with the breach proceedings despite the limitation period having passed.

The legal issue at the heart of this appeal is whether the trial judge had jurisdiction to hear and determine the proceedings for breach of a community-based order after the statutory limitation period had expired. The defendant argued that the trial judge was without jurisdiction to proceed with the breach proceedings, given that they were initiated beyond the statutory time limit. The central question was whether section 47(1A) of the Sentencing Act 1991, which provides for the initiation of proceedings for a breach of a community-based order, was subject to the general limitation periods set out in the Limitation Act 1969.

The Court held that the trial judge indeed lacked jurisdiction to proceed with the breach proceedings after the statutory limitation period had expired. The Court reasoned that the statutory limitation periods under the Limitation Act 1969 applied to the initiation of breach proceedings. Given that the proceedings in question were commenced outside this period, the trial judge was without jurisdiction to hear the matter. Consequently, the Court allowed the appeal and entered a verdict of acquittal for the defendant.

The final orders of the Court were that the appeal be allowed, the conviction for breach of the community-based order be quashed, and a verdict of acquittal be entered in its place. The Court's decision underscores the importance of adhering to statutory limitation periods in criminal proceedings, particularly in relation to the enforcement of community-based orders.

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established