Van Lieshout v Kelly - [2015] WASC 455

JURISDICTION : SUPREME COURT OF WESTERN AUSTRALIA
IN CRIMINAL

CITATION: VAN LIESHOUT -v- KELLY [2015] WASC 455

CORAM: LE MIERE J

HEARD: 12 NOVEMBER 2015

DELIVERED : 3 DECEMBER 2015

FILE NO/S: SJA 1063 of 2015
SJA 1078 of 2015

BETWEEN: TERESA ANGELA VAN LIESHOUT
Appellant
AND
ADAM DAVID KELLY
Respondent

ON APPEAL FROM:
For File No              :  SJA 1063 of 2015
Jurisdiction              :  MAGISTRATES COURT OF WESTERN AUSTRALIA
Coram  :MAGISTRATE S R MALLEY
File No  :FR 25064 of 2013, FR 25065 of 2013, FR 1387 of 2014, GN 1009 of 2015
For File No              :  SJA 1078 of 2015
Jurisdiction              :  MAGISTRATES COURT OF WESTERN AUSTRALIA
Coram  :MAGISTRATE R YOUNG
File No  :FR 25064 of 2013, FR 25065 of 2013, FR 1387 of 2014, GN 1009 of 2015

Catchwords:

Appeals against decision of the Magistrates Court of WA - Leave of the Supreme Court required - Decisions sought to be appealed from not appealable decisions - No grounds for review

Legislation:

Criminal Appeals Act 2004 (WA)
Criminal Procedure Act 2004 (WA)
Criminal Procedure Rules 2005 (WA)
Magistrates Court Act 2004 (WA)
The Rules of the Supreme Court 1971 (WA)

Result:

Applications for leave to appeal dismissed
Appeals dismissed
Application for review under Magistrate Court Act s 76 dismissed
Application for interim orders dismissed

Category: B

Representation:

Counsel:

Appellant: In person
Respondent: Ms A C Longden

Solicitors:

Appellant: In person
Respondent: Director of Public Prosecutions (WA)

Case(s) referred to in judgment(s):

MTI v SUL [No 2] [2012] WASCA 87
Van Lieshout v Kelly [2014] WASC 432

LE MIERE J: The appellant has filed two appeal notices against decisions of the Magistrates Court of Western Australia made on 31 July 2015, 3 September 2015 and 8 September 2015. Insofar as the appeals are made under the Criminal Appeals Act 2004 (WA) leave of the court is required for each ground of appeal.

Offences appellant charged with

Each of the decisions of the magistrate complained of relate to charges that the appellant wilfully and unlawfully damaged a wheel clamp, stole the wheel clamp, and on two occasions breached a bail undertaking by failing to appear in Fremantle Magistrates Court.
On 6 March 2015 the appellant appeared via video link before the Magistrates Court of Western Australia at Fremantle. The magistrate remanded the appellant to appear at her trial at the Fremantle Magistrates Court on 3 September 2015.

Magistrates Court hearing 31 July 2015

On 31 July 2015 the appellant appeared before the Magistrates Court at Fremantle. The appellant applied for an adjournment of her trial. The appellant requested that the trial be adjourned to December. The appellant said that her application was made on three grounds: (1) medical grounds; (2) government violence and corruption against the appellant; and (3) legal grounds.
The appellant's medical grounds were that she is suffering from stress. Her application was supported by three medical reports. The first was a report of 28 August 2014 by Dr Katharine Mallory, a general practitioner at…

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 Van Lieshout v Kelly

Details

AGLC: Van Lieshout v Kelly [2015] WASC 455
Case: [2015] WASC 455
Decision Date: 3 DECEMBER 2015

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The appeal was brought by Van Lieshout against Kelly, challenging a decision of the Magistrates Court of Western Australia. The case before the Supreme Court was an attempt to appeal against what Van Lieshout perceived as errors in the Magistrates Court's decisions. The primary contention was whether the decisions made by the Magistrates Court were indeed appealable, and if not, whether there were any grounds for review.

The central legal issue was the nature of the decisions made by the Magistrates Court and whether they qualified as appealable decisions under the relevant legislative framework. Additionally, the court had to determine if there were any other grounds for review that might permit the appeal to proceed despite the decisions not being appealable in the traditional sense.

The Supreme Court found that the decisions of the Magistrates Court were not appealable as they did not meet the criteria for appealable decisions. Furthermore, the court held that there were no other grounds for review that could permit the appeal. Consequently, the appeal was dismissed, and the decisions of the Magistrates Court remained in place. The Supreme Court emphasised the importance of adhering to the legal framework governing appeals and the necessity of ensuring that only legitimate appealable decisions are pursued through the appellate process.

Orders