R v Strbik [2002] NSWDRGC 1

R v Strbik [2002] NSWDRGC 1

Sections 322 and 326 of the Crimes Act 1900 include threats to do or cause injury or detriment, which can include a threat of violent conduct as an element of the offence. There was no sufficient reason to distinguish such threats from constructive violence accepted in robbery cases, and the threat to Mr Gatt had constructive violence that was real and immediate. The four offences therefore involved violent conduct within s.5(2) of the Drug Court Act 1998, so the applicant was not an eligible person.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
12 June 2002
Procedural Posture
Drug Court Eligibility Determination / Hearing to Determine Whether the Applicant Is an Eligible Person Within the Meaning of S.5 of the Drug Court Act 1998
Outcome
The applicant was found not to be an eligible person in respect of the four offences because they involved violent conduct within the meaning of s.5(2) of the Drug Court Act 1998.
Legal Topics
['eligible Person Under the Drug Court Act 1998' 'offence Involving Violent Conduct' 'constructive Violence' 'threats to Witnesses and Public Justice Officials']
['criminal Law' 'drug Court Procedure'] ['eligible Person Under the Drug Court Act 1998' 'offence Involving Violent Conduct' 'constructive Violence' 'threats to Witnesses and Public Justice Officials']

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

Drug Court Eligibility Determination / Hearing to Determine Whether the Applicant Is an Eligible Person Within the Meaning of S.5 of the Drug Court Act 1998

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the applicant is an eligible person within the meaning of s.5 of the Drug Court Act 1998.' 'Whether offences under s.322 or s.326 of the Crimes Act 1900 involving threats to witnesses or public justice officials are offences involving violent conduct within s.5(2)(b) of the Drug Court Act 1998.' 'Whether indirect or non-immediate threats can constitute violent conduct for the purposes of Drug Court eligibility.']

Ratio Decidendi

Sections 322 and 326 of the Crimes Act 1900 include threats to do or cause injury or detriment, which can include a threat of violent conduct as an element of the offence. There was no sufficient reason to distinguish such threats from constructive violence accepted in robbery cases, and the threat to Mr Gatt had constructive violence that was real and immediate. The four offences therefore involved violent conduct within s.5(2) of the Drug Court Act 1998, so the applicant was not an eligible person.

Court Disposition

The applicant was found not to be an eligible person in respect of the four offences because they involved violent conduct within the meaning of s.5(2) of the Drug Court Act 1998.

Orders

  • []