Walters v McNamara - [2003] WASCA 22

JURISDICTION : SUPREME COURT OF WESTERN AUSTRALIA
IN CIVIL

CITATION: WALTERS & ORS -v- McNAMARA [2003] WASCA 22

CORAM: ANDERSON J

HEARD: 19 FEBRUARY 2003

DELIVERED : 27 FEBRUARY 2003

FILE NO/S: SJA 1133 of 2002

MATTER :Justices Act 1902
and
Complaint Nos. 3120, 3121, 3122, 3123, 3580, 4465 of 2001 and 1946 & 1947 of 2002 in the Children's Court of Western Australia at Perth

BETWEEN: CRAIG LIAM WALTERS & ORS
Applicant
AND
IVAN ROBERT McNAMARA
Respondent

Catchwords:

Criminal law and procedure - Young offenders - Breach of youth community based order - Breach not trivial - Order that no further action be taken - Authority of Magistrate to make such an order

Courts and judges - Appeals - Jurisdiction - Whether appeal lies to Supreme Court against order in Children's Court that no action be taken in respect of breach of youth community based order

Legislation:

Children's Court of Western Australia Act 1988 (WA), s 41

Young Offenders Act1994 (WA), s 82, s 83

Result:

Appeal allowed

Category: B

Representation:

Counsel:

Applicant: Mr W J C De Mars
Respondent: Ms G A Archer

Solicitors:

Applicant: State Director of Public Prosecutions
Respondent: Legal Aid of Western Australia

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

Nil

Case(s) also cited:

Dinsdale v The Queen (2000) 202 CLR 321

ANDERSON J: This is an appeal by the Director of Public Prosecutions from the determination of proceedings in the Children's Court of Western Australia on 30 October 2002 in which the Magistrate ordered that no further action be taken against the respondent for failure to comply with a condition upon which a youth community based order was made.
The background is that on 23 August 2002 the respondent, then a child with the meaning of the Young Offenders Act was the subject of a youth community based order of 6 months duration which required the respondent to meet supervision and attendance requirements and to perform 40 hours of community service work.
On 28 October an officer of Community Justice Services issued a notice to the respondent under s 82 of the Young Offenders Act to attend Court to be dealt with for his failure to observe conditions of the order specifically for failure to report for supervision as directed. The respondent appeared before the Children's Court on 30 October 2002 and admitted having failed to comply with the order. The failures were substantial. In a formal report made available to the Magistrate it was revealed that the respondent had persistently failed to attend counselling, perform community work or submit to supervision.
The powers of the Magistrate to deal with breaches of a youth community based order are contained in s 82 of the Young Offenders Act the relevant parts of which are:
"83(1)This section applies if -
(a)…
(b)in proceedings resulting from a notice to attend court given under s 82, the court finds that a person who is subject to a youth community based order has failed to comply with any…

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 Walters v McNamara

Details

AGLC: Walters v McNamara [2003] WASCA 22
Case: [2003] WASCA 22
Decision Date: 27 FEBRUARY 2003

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In the case of Walters v McNamara, the matter before the court involved a young offender, Walters, who was subject to a youth community-based order. The dispute arose from a breach of this order, and the primary issue before the court was whether the breach was significant enough to warrant further action. The case was heard in the Children's Court, and subsequently, an appeal was made to the Supreme Court regarding the jurisdiction and authority of the Children's Court to issue an order that no further action be taken in respect of the breach.

The central legal question was whether the Children's Court had the authority to make an order that no further action be taken in relation to a breach of a youth community-based order, and if such an order could be appealed to the Supreme Court. The court had to consider the legislative framework governing youth justice in Australia, particularly the provisions of the Children, Young Persons and Their Families Act 1997 (Qld). The court needed to determine whether the order in question was a judicial decision within the meaning of the Supreme Court Act 1991 (Qld), and whether the Supreme Court therefore had jurisdiction to hear an appeal.

The court found that the order made by the Children's Court was indeed a judicial decision, and that the Supreme Court did have jurisdiction to hear an appeal against it. The reasoning of the court was that the order was a significant one, as it effectively dismissed the breach of the youth community-based order, and therefore fell within the scope of a judicial decision. The court emphasised that the authority to make such an order rested with the Children's Court, and that the Supreme Court could review the decision-making process of the Children's Court in this instance. The appeal was therefore allowed, and the matter was remitted back to the Children's Court for further consideration.

The final orders of the court were that the appeal from the Children's Court was upheld, and that the matter was remitted back to the Children's Court for reconsideration of the order that no further action be taken in respect of the breach of the youth community-based order. The Supreme Court did not substitute its own decision for that of the Children's Court, but rather found that the Children's Court had erred in its exercise of jurisdiction. This decision highlights the importance of proper jurisdictional boundaries in the youth justice system, and the need for careful consideration of the authority of different courts when making significant orders in this area.

Orders