City of Canada Bay Council v Frank Edward Bird; City of Canada Bay Council v Michael John Christopher (No. 2) [2003] NSWLEC 152

City of Canada Bay Council v Frank Edward Bird; City of Canada Bay Council v Michael John Christopher (No. 2) [2003] NSWLEC 152

Given the good character, absence of prior convictions, the extenuating belief that trees were dying not dead, offers to remediate, and payment of costs, the Court found it appropriate to apply s 10 of the Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999: the charges were dismissed without conviction and subject to fulfillment of remedial orders.

Parties
Prosecutor: City of Canada Bay Council; Defendant: Frank Edward Bird; Defendant: Michael John Christopher
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
24 June 2003
Procedural Posture
Prosecution / Penalty Hearing and Sentencing
Outcome
charges dismissed without conviction under s 10 Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999, subject to remedial orders and costs
Legal Topics
Tree Preservation, Penalties, Sentencing Procedure
Environmental Law Criminal Procedure Tree Preservation Penalties Sentencing Procedure

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 4 Authorities cited 10 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

City of Canada Bay Council

Prosecutor

Frank Edward Bird

Defendant

Michael John Christopher

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Prosecution / Penalty Hearing and Sentencing

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether penalties should be imposed for breach of tree preservation order under s 125 Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979; Whether the benefit of s 10 Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999 should be extended to the defendants

Ratio Decidendi

Given the good character, absence of prior convictions, the extenuating belief that trees were dying not dead, offers to remediate, and payment of costs, the Court found it appropriate to apply s 10 of the Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999: the charges were dismissed without conviction and subject to fulfillment of remedial orders.

Court Disposition

charges dismissed without conviction under s 10 Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999, subject to remedial orders and costs

Orders

  • Each defendant found guilty; without proceeding to conviction and subject to further orders, charge dismissed pursuant to s 10 Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999.
  • If owners permit, each defendant to supply and arrange for planting two replacement trees at 26 Walter Crescent Abbotsford in consultation with the other defendant.