Police v Amanda BARBER [2011] NSWLC 12

Police v Amanda BARBER [2011] NSWLC 12

Although s 173 of the Road Transport (General) Act 2005 was not available because the alleged offence was assault under the Crimes Act and not an offence under road transport legislation, s 14 of the Law Enforcement (Powers and Responsibilities) Act 2002 was an available source of power. The information requested, being the driver's name and place of abode, corresponded with the person's identity as defined for LEPRA purposes. Because the defendant provided no information at all, the request was not complied with, and there was evidence which, if accepted, could establish every element of the offence under s 17(1).

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
08 February 2011
Procedural Posture
Criminal Prosecution for Failure of Owner to Disclose Identity Under S 17(1) of the Law Enforcement (powers and Responsibilities) Act 2002 / Procedural Ruling on Whether a Prima Facie Case Existed
Outcome
The prosecution established a prima facie case.
Legal Topics
['failure to Disclose Identity of Driver' 'prima Facie Case' 'exercise of Statutory Power Under Wrong Head of Power' 'requests for Information by Police']
['criminal Law' 'police Powers' 'road Transport'] ['failure to Disclose Identity of Driver' 'prima Facie Case' 'exercise of Statutory Power Under Wrong Head of Power' 'requests for Information by Police']

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 Prosecution for Failure of Owner to Disclose Identity Under S 17(1) of the Law Enforcement (powers and Responsibilities) Act 2002 / Procedural Ruling on Whether a Prima Facie Case Existed

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the prosecution established evidence which, if accepted, could establish every element of the offence charged under s 17(1) of the Law Enforcement (Powers and Responsibilities) Act 2002.' 'Whether a request made by reference to s 173 of the Road Transport (General) Act 2005 could support a charge under s 17(1) of the Law Enforcement (Powers and Responsibilities) Act 2002 when the s 173 precondition was not met.' 'Whether the request to disclose the name and place of abode of the driver was within the information that could be requested under s 14 of the Law Enforcement (Powers and Responsibilities) Act 2002.']

Ratio Decidendi

Although s 173 of the Road Transport (General) Act 2005 was not available because the alleged offence was assault under the Crimes Act and not an offence under road transport legislation, s 14 of the Law Enforcement (Powers and Responsibilities) Act 2002 was an available source of power. The information requested, being the driver's name and place of abode, corresponded with the person's identity as defined for LEPRA purposes. Because the defendant provided no information at all, the request was not complied with, and there was evidence which, if accepted, could establish every element of the offence under s 17(1).

Court Disposition

The prosecution established a prima facie case.

Orders

  • ['I am satisfied that the prosecution has established that there is evidence that, if accepted, could establish every element of the offence charged, and I rule accordingly.']