R v Parker [2012] NSWDC 259

R v Parker [2012] NSWDC 259

Mr Parker's failure to enter the courtroom when his matter was called, because he was in conference with the duty barrister and did not hear the matter called, was a misadventure that prevented him from defending the original Local Court proceedings. His earlier s 4 application did not constitute taking action in relation to the original Local Court proceedings for the purposes of s 8(2)(b). The Deputy Chief Magistrate therefore focused on the wrong issue, and the application should be granted.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
11 September 2012
Procedural Posture
Criminal Law Annulment Application Concerning Conviction Entered in Absence / District Court Application/appeal From Local Court Refusal of Annulment Application
Outcome
Application granted and the matter remitted to the Local Court for hearing.
Legal Topics
['annulment Application' 'conviction Entered in Absence' 'misadventure' 'local Court Proceedings']
['criminal Law' 'criminal Procedure'] ['annulment Application' 'conviction Entered in Absence' 'misadventure' 'local Court Proceedings']

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 1 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Procedural Posture

Criminal Law Annulment Application Concerning Conviction Entered in Absence / District Court Application/appeal From Local Court Refusal of Annulment Application

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether Mr Parker was entitled to have a conviction entered in his absence annulled.' 'Whether Mr Parker was hindered by misadventure from taking action in relation to the original Local Court proceedings within s 8(2)(b) of the Crimes (Appeal and Review) Act.' 'Whether making and withdrawing an earlier s 4 application meant Mr Parker had taken action in relation to the original Local Court proceedings for the purposes of s 8(2)(b).']

Ratio Decidendi

Mr Parker's failure to enter the courtroom when his matter was called, because he was in conference with the duty barrister and did not hear the matter called, was a misadventure that prevented him from defending the original Local Court proceedings. His earlier s 4 application did not constitute taking action in relation to the original Local Court proceedings for the purposes of s 8(2)(b). The Deputy Chief Magistrate therefore focused on the wrong issue, and the application should be granted.

Court Disposition

Application granted and the matter remitted to the Local Court for hearing.

Orders

  • ['Application is granted.' 'The matter is remitted to the Local Court for hearing.' 'Adjourned to Wednesday 18 September 2012.']