R v Simon Lees (No 2) (Verdict); R v Stuart Lewry (No 2) (Verdict) [2019] NSWDC 118

R v Simon Lees (No 2) (Verdict); R v Stuart Lewry (No 2) (Verdict) [2019] NSWDC 118

The Court found that the prosecution failed to prove beyond reasonable doubt that Simon Lees was assigned or assumed the relevant duties of maintenance, repair, or safety of the bus fleet. No documented or direct evidence established the necessary legal responsibility on him. In respect of Stuart Lewry, the Court concluded that his duty as a Heavy Vehicle Inspector was not to repair but to inspect for the defect noted, and the evidence did not exclude the reasonable possibility he performed the inspection as required. There was insufficient evidence that any breach of duty by either accused was a substantial or criminally punishable cause of death or injury, especially given the voluntary...

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
11 April 2019
Procedural Posture
Criminal / Judge Alone Verdict
Outcome
Both accused found not guilty on all counts.
Legal Topics
['expert Evidence' 'criminal Negligence' 'duty of Care' 'causation' 'hearsay' 'judge Alone Trial' 'manslaughter' 'grievous Bodily Harm' 'heavy Vehicle Regulation']
['criminal Law'] ['expert Evidence' 'criminal Negligence' 'duty of Care' 'causation' 'hearsay' 'judge Alone Trial' 'manslaughter' 'grievous Bodily Harm' 'heavy Vehicle Regulation']

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 1 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Procedural Posture

Criminal / Judge Alone Verdict

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether Simon Lees owed and breached a duty of care in respect to the maintenance and safety of the bus fleet, including the vehicle involved.' 'Whether Stuart Lewry breached his duty of care in certifying the coach as safe and clearing the RTA defect notice without proper inspection.' "Whether any breach of duty by the accused was a substantial and criminally punishable cause of Graham Lees' death and Jan Wizbicki's injury." 'Whether criminal liability attaches given the role and actions of the deceased in operating the vehicle.']

Ratio Decidendi

The Court found that the prosecution failed to prove beyond reasonable doubt that Simon Lees was assigned or assumed the relevant duties of maintenance, repair, or safety of the bus fleet. No documented or direct evidence established the necessary legal responsibility on him. In respect of Stuart Lewry, the Court concluded that his duty as a Heavy Vehicle Inspector was not to repair but to inspect for the defect noted, and the evidence did not exclude the reasonable possibility he performed the inspection as required. There was insufficient evidence that any breach of duty by either accused was a substantial or criminally punishable cause of death or injury, especially given the voluntary...

Court Disposition

Both accused found not guilty on all counts.

Orders

  • ['Simon Lees found not guilty on count 1 (unlawful killing of Graham Lees) and count 2 (causing grievous bodily harm to Jan Wizbicki by negligent act).' 'Stuart Lewry found not guilty on count 1 (unlawful killing of Graham Lees) and count 2 (causing grievous bodily harm to Jan Wizbicki by negligent act).']