R v Buttigieg [2002] NSWDRGC 2

R v Buttigieg [2002] NSWDRGC 2

The mere existence of a breached bond for an offence involving violent conduct, not referred to the Drug Court under section 6, does not of itself render the applicant ineligible to enter the Drug Court program. Eligibility is determined with respect to the matters before the Drug Court, and unreferred charges or bonds may not impact eligibility. However, the Court retains discretion to refuse entry if outstanding matters would impede participation.

Parties
Prosecution: Regina; Offender: John Anthony Buttigieg
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
26 June 2002
Procedural Posture
Application for Entry to Drug Court Program / Eligibility Determination; Interlocutory Adjournment
Outcome
Matter adjourned for further consideration in light of findings.
Legal Topics
Eligibility for Drug Court Program, Offences Involving Violent Conduct, Interpretation of Drug Court Act 1998 (nsw)

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 5 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Regina

Prosecution

John Anthony Buttigieg

Offender

Procedural Posture

Application for Entry to Drug Court Program / Eligibility Determination; Interlocutory Adjournment

  1. 1 Whether a breached bond for an offence involving violent conduct renders the applicant ineligible for Drug Court program under section 5(2) of the Drug Court Act 1998 (NSW)
  2. 2 Whether the existence of outstanding charges or bonds before other courts affects eligibility for Drug Court programs

Ratio Decidendi

The mere existence of a breached bond for an offence involving violent conduct, not referred to the Drug Court under section 6, does not of itself render the applicant ineligible to enter the Drug Court program. Eligibility is determined with respect to the matters before the Drug Court, and unreferred charges or bonds may not impact eligibility. However, the Court retains discretion to refuse entry if outstanding matters would impede participation.

Court Disposition

Matter adjourned for further consideration in light of findings.

Orders

  • Application adjourned to 23 July 2002 for further consideration.