Graham, N.W. v Ninness, R.T. [1986] FCA 98

Graham, N.W. v Ninness, R.T. [1986] FCA 98

The Court held that despite the ambiguity in the statutory language, the legislative history and purpose supported the interpretation that the conviction for an indictable offence dealt with summarily under s. 92 and in the manner provided in Part VII attracted the right of appeal under s. 208(1)(a); thus, the appeal to the Supreme Court was competent.

Parties
Appellant: Neil William Graham; Respondent: Richard Thomas Ninness
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
03 December 1986
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Judgment
Outcome
appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Summary Jurisdiction, Appeals From Court of Petty Sessions, Indictable Offences Dealt With Summarily
Criminal Law Procedure Summary Jurisdiction Appeals From Court of Petty Sessions Indictable Offences Dealt With Summarily

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 2 Authorities cited 4 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Neil William Graham

Appellant

Richard Thomas Ninness

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Appeal / Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether an appeal to the Supreme Court of the Australian Capital Territory was competent from a conviction by the Court of Petty Sessions for an indictable offence dealt with summarily by consent

Ratio Decidendi

The Court held that despite the ambiguity in the statutory language, the legislative history and purpose supported the interpretation that the conviction for an indictable offence dealt with summarily under s. 92 and in the manner provided in Part VII attracted the right of appeal under s. 208(1)(a); thus, the appeal to the Supreme Court was competent.

Court Disposition

appeal dismissed

Orders

  • The appeal be dismissed.
  • The appellant pay the respondent's costs of the appeal.