Roads & Maritime Services v Noble-Hiblen [2019] NSWSC 1230

Roads & Maritime Services v Noble-Hiblen [2019] NSWSC 1230

The Magistrate erred in law by treating Mr Noble-Hiblen's non-expert measurements and calculations, and her own computations, as sufficient to raise a doubt about the speed camera's accuracy, reliability and correct operation. Section 141 of the Road Transport Act 2013 (NSW) meant that only expert evidence duly admitted in accordance with s 79 Evidence Act 1995 (NSW) was legally capable of rebutting the relevant prima facie evidence or statutory presumptions, or raising the doubt referred to in s 140. No such expert evidence was adduced.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
18 September 2019
Procedural Posture
Supreme Court Appeal From Local Court Summary Proceedings for a Speeding Offence / Appeal as of Right Under S 56(1)(c) Crimes (appeal and Review) Act 2001 (nsw), Limited to Questions of Law Alone
Outcome
Appeal allowed; Local Court dismissal set aside; matter remitted to the Local Court for re-determination; no order as to costs.
Legal Topics
['speed Camera Evidence' 'approved Traffic Enforcement Device' 'expert Evidence' 'questions of Law on Appeal' 'prima Facie Evidence and Statutory Presumptions']
['criminal Law' 'traffic Law' 'evidence' 'appeals'] ['speed Camera Evidence' 'approved Traffic Enforcement Device' 'expert Evidence' 'questions of Law on Appeal' 'prima Facie Evidence and Statutory Presumptions']

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

Supreme Court Appeal From Local Court Summary Proceedings for a Speeding Offence / Appeal as of Right Under S 56(1)(c) Crimes (appeal and Review) Act 2001 (nsw), Limited to Questions of Law Alone

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether the Local Court erred in treating the defendant's non-expert measurements and calculations, and the Magistrate's own computations, as sufficient to raise a doubt about the accuracy, reliability or correct operation of the approved traffic enforcement device." "Whether ss 140 and 141 of the Road Transport Act 2013 (NSW) required expert evidence to rebut the prosecution's prima facie evidence or statutory presumptions, or to raise a relevant doubt." 'Whether the alleged errors were questions of law alone for the purposes of the appeal.']

Ratio Decidendi

The Magistrate erred in law by treating Mr Noble-Hiblen's non-expert measurements and calculations, and her own computations, as sufficient to raise a doubt about the speed camera's accuracy, reliability and correct operation. Section 141 of the Road Transport Act 2013 (NSW) meant that only expert evidence duly admitted in accordance with s 79 Evidence Act 1995 (NSW) was legally capable of rebutting the relevant prima facie evidence or statutory presumptions, or raising the doubt referred to in s 140. No such expert evidence was adduced.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; Local Court dismissal set aside; matter remitted to the Local Court for re-determination; no order as to costs.

Orders

  • ['Appeal allowed.' 'Set aside the order made in the Local Court on 22 May 2019 dismissing the prosecution.' 'Remit the matter to the Local Court for re-determination in accordance with my reasons.' 'No order as to costs.']