Howard v Senior Constable Risteski [2012] NSWSC 1150

Howard v Senior Constable Risteski [2012] NSWSC 1150

Section 3(2) of the Inclosed Lands Protection Act 1901 did not apply to the Incident Location because Laman Street was not a public thoroughfare at the relevant time, having been lawfully closed under s 115 of the Roads Act 1993. Therefore, Mr Howard was situated on inclosed lands for the purposes of the Act and committed an offence by remaining after being requested to leave.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
24 September 2012
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Appeal From Local Court Judgment
Outcome
Appeal dismissed; conviction and penalty confirmed
Legal Topics
['appeal From Local Court' 'inclosed Lands Protection Act' 'interpretation of Statutory Definitions' 'meaning of Inclosed Lands' 'temporary Road Closure' 'barriers and Fencing']

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

Criminal Appeal / Appeal From Local Court Judgment

  1. 1 ['Whether Magistrate erred in law in holding that plaintiff was on inclosed lands' 'Applicability of s 3(2) of the Inclosed Lands Protection Act 1901' 'Whether plaintiff was situated on a road for purposes of s 3(2) of the Act' 'Effect of temporary closure of road and erection of fencing on legal status of land']

Ratio Decidendi

Section 3(2) of the Inclosed Lands Protection Act 1901 did not apply to the Incident Location because Laman Street was not a public thoroughfare at the relevant time, having been lawfully closed under s 115 of the Roads Act 1993. Therefore, Mr Howard was situated on inclosed lands for the purposes of the Act and committed an offence by remaining after being requested to leave.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed; conviction and penalty confirmed

Orders

  • ['Appeal dismissed' 'Conviction and penalty confirmed' 'No order as to costs']