PETERS v ASPLUND & HER HONOUR, MAGISTRATE O'SHANE [2008] NSWSC 1061

PETERS v ASPLUND & HER HONOUR, MAGISTRATE O'SHANE [2008] NSWSC 1061

The warrant for the plaintiff's arrest was invalid because the subpoena was improperly addressed ('South Australia Police' is not a legal entity or 'person named' under s.222), no application was made for the warrant under s.229(1), and pre-conditions in s.229(2) (including opportunity for just or reasonable excuse)...

Source-derived case information.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
09 October 2008
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review, Relief Against Warrant, Declaratory Relief / Final Judgment
Outcome
warrant quashed; declaration that subpoena was not issued in compliance with s.222
Legal Topics
['subpoena' 'arrest Warrant' 'procedural Fairness' 'statutory Interpretation']
['criminal Law' 'procedure'] ['subpoena' 'arrest Warrant' 'procedural Fairness' 'statutory Interpretation']

Source-derived case record

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

Judicial Review, Relief Against Warrant, Declaratory Relief / Final Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Was the subpoena validly issued under s.222 of the Criminal Procedure Act 1986?' "Did the Local Court have power to issue a warrant for the plaintiff's arrest under s.229 of the Criminal Procedure Act?" 'Was the plaintiff denied procedural fairness before the warrant was issued?' "Is 'South Australia Police' a proper person named for a subpoena?"]

Ratio Decidendi

The warrant for the plaintiff's arrest was invalid because the subpoena was improperly addressed ('South Australia Police' is not a legal entity or 'person named' under s.222), no application was made for the warrant under s.229(1), and pre-conditions in s.229(2) (including opportunity for just or reasonable excuse) were not satisfied. Procedural fairness was denied by refusal of adjournment.

Court Disposition

warrant quashed; declaration that subpoena was not issued in compliance with s.222

Orders

  • ['Declaration that the subpoena issued on 2 September 2008 and returnable on 30 September 2008 directed to South Australia Police was issued contrary to s.222 of the Criminal Procedure Act.' "The warrant for the arrest of Charmaine Peters issued by Magistrate O'Shane on 30 September 2008 is quashed."]