Tassell v Hayes [1987] HCA 21

Tassell v Hayes [1987] HCA 21

On the proper construction of Div. II of Pt V of the Justices Act 1921 S.A., especially s. 122, the statutory safeguards concerning a defendant's election to be tried upon indictment, the court's duty to inform the defendant whether it proposes to deal with the case summarily, and the possible continuation of proceedings as a preliminary examination imply that the defendant must be present in person. A court of summary jurisdiction therefore has no power to proceed with an ex parte hearing and determination of an information for a minor indictable offence.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal on Stated Questions of Law / High Court Appeal From the Full Court of the Supreme Court of South Australia
Outcome
Appeal allowed.
Legal Topics
['minor Indictable Offences' 'summary Jurisdiction' 'ex Parte Hearing' 'presence of Defendant' 'election to Be Tried Upon Indictment']
['criminal Law' 'criminal Procedure' 'statutory Interpretation'] ['minor Indictable Offences' 'summary Jurisdiction' 'ex Parte Hearing' 'presence of Defendant' 'election to Be Tried Upon Indictment']

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 on Stated Questions of Law / High Court Appeal From the Full Court of the Supreme Court of South Australia

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether a court of summary jurisdiction has power to proceed with an ex parte hearing and determination of an information for a minor indictable offence.' 'Whether, if such power exists, the determination to proceed ex parte was properly made in the circumstances of the case.' 'Whether Div. II of Pt V of the Justices Act 1921 S.A. requires the defendant to be present in person during the hearing and determination in a summary way of a minor indictable offence.']

Ratio Decidendi

On the proper construction of Div. II of Pt V of the Justices Act 1921 S.A., especially s. 122, the statutory safeguards concerning a defendant's election to be tried upon indictment, the court's duty to inform the defendant whether it proposes to deal with the case summarily, and the possible continuation of proceedings as a preliminary examination imply that the defendant must be present in person. A court of summary jurisdiction therefore has no power to proceed with an ex parte hearing and determination of an information for a minor indictable offence.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed.

Orders

  • ['Appeal allowed.' 'Question (i), whether a court of summary jurisdiction has the power to proceed with an ex parte hearing and determination of an information for a minor indictable offence, answered: No.' 'Question (ii), whether the determination to proceed ex parte was properly made in the circumstances of the...