DPP v Nouata & Ors [2009] NSWSC 72

DPP v Nouata & Ors [2009] NSWSC 72

The Magistrate erred by failing to make findings or refer to the requirements of s 98(3) Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999. Given the non-trivial nature of the new offence and lack of reasoning under the statutory test, relief is granted as sought by the DPP.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
16 February 2009
Procedural Posture
Application for Prerogative Relief / First Instance Judgment (ex Tempore)
Outcome
Orders made in accordance with the summons; costs ordered against first defendant; Suitors Fund Certificate if qualified.
Legal Topics
['prerogative Relief' 'breach of Recognizance' 'failure to Exercise Jurisdiction' 'call Up for Breach of Bond']
['criminal Law' 'criminal Procedure'] ['prerogative Relief' 'breach of Recognizance' 'failure to Exercise Jurisdiction' 'call Up for Breach of Bond']

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

Application for Prerogative Relief / First Instance Judgment (ex Tempore)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the Magistrate failed to exercise jurisdiction by not considering the requirements of s 98(3) Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999 when declining to take action on a breach of recognizance']

Ratio Decidendi

The Magistrate erred by failing to make findings or refer to the requirements of s 98(3) Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999. Given the non-trivial nature of the new offence and lack of reasoning under the statutory test, relief is granted as sought by the DPP.

Court Disposition

Orders made in accordance with the summons; costs ordered against first defendant; Suitors Fund Certificate if qualified.

Orders

  • ['Orders in terms of paragraphs 1, 2 and 3 of the summons filed herein.' "First defendant to pay plaintiff's costs." 'First defendant is to have a Suitors Fund Certificate in respect of those costs, if otherwise qualifies.']