Australian Capital Territory Bills Explanatory Statements
[Index]
[Search]
[Download]
[Bill]
[Help]
COURT LEGISLATION AMENDMENT BILL 2008
2008
LEGISLATIVE
ASSEMBLY FOR THE AUSTRALIAN CAPITAL
TERRITORY
COURT
LEGISLATION AMENDMENT
BILL 2008
EXPLANATORY
STATEMENT
Presented
by the authority of
Mr Simon Corbell
MLA
Attorney General
COURT LEGISLATION AMENDMENT
BILL 2008
Overview of
Bill
This Bill contains a number of reforms to the
ACT’s court legislation, which in many ways is outdated, inefficient and
due for reform. Following consultation with court stakeholders, a number of
amendments to court legislation have been introduced to better reflect evolving
practice and to aid improved efficiency in the courts.
The proposed amendments are detailed
below.Introduction of a Court Attendance
NoticeCurrently, commencement of
proceedings must be carried out in accordance with Chapter 3 of the
Magistrates Court Act 1930. The legislation requires police officers to
attend court to ‘lay information’ before a magistrate so that the
court can issue a summons for the attendance of the defendant on a particular
date. This has resulted in great time and financial expenditure for the police,
courts, Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP) and other court stakeholders. It
has facilitated a high rate of poor attendance by defendants and inefficiently
diverts court resources from attention to more substantive
issues.In line with other jurisdictions, the
Bill implements a Court Attendance Notice (CAN) to address the inadequacies of
the current commencement procedures. A CAN is issued at the time of charging
and provides the following information to the
defendant:•
the
offence;•
a brief outline of the particulars
of the offence;•
name of the police officer
or person authorised under a law of the
Territory;•
the time and date that the
accused must appear in court;•
advises that
non-attendance will result in a warrant for arrest;
and•
explains that in non-attendance
scenarios, the case may be heard in the defendant’s
absence.The CAN system of commencement has
many advantages over the current method of commencing proceedings. It will
reduce the amount of time accused persons remain in police custody, as it will
significantly simplify the process whereby their criminal matters are commenced.
Another benefit to the accused is the receipt of more information about the
charge at the point of release, and greater certainty about the nature of the
charge. The system will lead to more efficient use of resources, as police are
not required to attend court to “lay information”, saving time and
keeping more police on the street. It also allows more time for the courts to
deal with substantive issues.For transitional
purposes and to allow flexibility for stakeholders, the CAN will supplement the
existing commencement procedures during a 12 month trial of the CAN, after which
existing procedures will be repealed if the CAN process is found to be
satisfactory.Reference
AppealsSection 37S of the Supreme Court
Act 1933 provides a means whereby the Court of Appeal may hear and decide a
question of law arising at, or in relation to, a Supreme Court trial. The
decision on the reference appeal does not invalidate or affect any verdict or
decision given at the trial. Similarly, division 3.10.2A of the Magistrates
Court Act deals with reference appeals from decisions of the Magistrates Court
to the Supreme Court. Crucially, both Acts currently limit the availability of
reference appeals to issues arising from a trial on indictment that resulted in
an acquittal.Important questions of law can
arise in any criminal proceedings. If these questions remain unresolved, future
prosecutions may be jeopardised due to uncertainty. Given the safeguard that a
reference appeal decision cannot invalidate or affect the original verdict or
decision in a case, reference appeals provide an important avenue for the DPP
and the Attorney General to obtain guidance regarding interpretation of the law.
Accordingly, the relevant sections of the Acts have been amended to delete the
acquittal criterion. Importantly, the safeguard that a reference appeal
decision cannot invalidate or affect the original verdict or decision in a case
remains in both Acts.Changes to
Requirements for Written Statements Admitted as
EvidenceCurrently, section 90AA(3)(a) of
the Magistrates Court Act requires that a written statement admitted as evidence
must be in the form of a statutory declaration. In practice, this means that
after a document is prepared, it must be signed in the presence of a person
authorised to witness a statutory declaration. The requirement for a witness is
unnecessary and has been removed in New South Wales (in favour of rules setting
out the formal requirements such a document must take). As the criminal law
consequences of a false statement made to a court are equivalent under either
process, this appears to be an appropriate
change.Criminal Appeals Jurisdiction in the
Court of AppealWhen the Supreme Court
exercises appellate jurisdiction, it is known as the Court of Appeal. Part 2A
of the Supreme Court Act sets out the court’s appellate jurisdiction. It
provides that orders of the court, including convictions, may be appealed. The
High Court, in R v Hillier,[1]
has given part 2A a broad definition (in line with its counterparts in other
jurisdictions). To reflect the terms of this decision, part 2A has been amended
to provide that an appeal:•
should be
allowed if the verdict of the jury is unreasonable or cannot be
supported;•
should be allowed if the order
was wrong in law or a miscarriage of justice;
and•
should be dismissed if no substantial
miscarriage of justice has actually
occurred.Representation of the DPP in the
Magistrates CourtThe Director of Public
Prosecutions Act 1990 has been amended to allow the DPP’s non-legal
practitioner staff to appear on the DPP’s behalf in the callover list.
The call-over list is the process by which the Registrar liaises with the DPP
and the defence counsel to determine an appropriate date for proceedings to
commence. This amendment is consistent with the Magistrates Court Practice
Directions released in 2007, which permit a DPP paralegal to represent the DPP
in the callover list, while the prosecutor appears in matters before the
Magistrate. Practice Directions are designed to streamline the court’s
procedures and encourage best practice in the Magistrates Court. Allowing
non-legal practitioner staff to appear in the callover list allows for more
efficient use of the court and the DPP’s time and resources, freeing
prosecutors to work on technical legal matters.
Clause Notes
PART 1 –
Preliminary
Clause 1 – Name of Act – names
the Act as the Court Legislation Amendment Act
2008.
Clause 2 – Commencement
– commences the Act on a day fixed by the Minister by written
notice.
PART 2 – Crimes
(Restorative Justice) Act 2004
Clause 3 – Legislation amended – pt 2
– states that this part amends the Crimes (Restorative Justice) Act
2004.
Clause 4 – Referring
entities, Section 22(2), definition of prosecution referral, paragraph
(b) – amends the list of forms of referral of the offender for
prosecution to specifically refer to the new court attendance notice under the
Magistrates Court Act 1930. The list already includes a court attendance
notice, but has been updated to clarify that the reference is to the new court
attendance notice under the Magistrates Court Act 1930.
PART 3 – Director of Public
Prosecutions Act 1990
Clause 5 – Legislation amended – pt 3
– states that this part amends the Director of Public Prosecutions
Act 1990.
Clause 6 –
Representation of Territory and Territory authorities, Section 11(3) –
this amendment is consequential to new section 16(d), which allows non-legal
practitioner staff of the DPP to appear in the Magistrates Court callover list.
The amendment confirms that only the legal practitioners listed in subsections
16(a)-(c) may represent the DPP in all other parts of the
proceeding.
Clause 7 – Appearances by
director, New section 16(d) – amends section 16 to allow non-legal
practitioner staff of the DPP to appear in the Magistrates Court callover list
on behalf of the DPP, consistent with Practice Direction 2 of 2007, paragraph
3.2.
Clause 8 – Dictionary, note 2,
new dot point – this amendment is consequential to new section 16(d),
and amends the dictionary to define ‘Magistrates Court’ for this
purpose.
PART 4 – Magistrates Court
Act 1930
Clause 9 Legislation amended
– pt 4 – states that this part amends
the Magistrates Court Act 1930.
Clause 10 New division 3.3.3A – inserts
a new division 3.3.3A, which introduces the Court Attendance Notice (CAN) method
of commencing criminal proceedings in the Magistrates
Court.
New section 41A includes definitions for
new division 3.3.3A.
New section 41B states
that a proceeding for an alleged offence may be commenced by the service and
filing of a CAN under this division. Section 41B also sets out the required
content of the CAN, which must:
• state the
name of the person;
• describe the offence
(it is sufficient to describe an offence in a CAN in the way the offence is
described in the law that creates the
offence);
• briefly state the particulars of
the alleged offence;
• state the name of the
police officer or person authorised under a law of the Territory;
and
• require the defendant to appear before
a Magistrates at a stated date, time and place, unless a warrant is issued for
the person’s arrest or the person is refused bail;
and
• state, unless a warrant is issued for
the person’s arrest or the person is refused bail, that failure to appear
may result in the person’s arrest or in the proceeding being dealt with in
the person’s absence.
The date stated for
the person to appear before a magistrate must be at least 14 days after the day
the notice is served. The rules may prescribe additional matters that must be
included in a court attendance notice. Any form that is approved under the
Court Procedures Act 2004 for this provision must be
used.
New section 41C deals with the service
requirements for the CAN. Section 41C states that if an authorised person
suspects, on reasonable grounds, that a person has committed an offence, the
authorised person may serve a court attendance notice on the person. The
section requires personal service of a CAN, as defined in part 6.8 of the
Court Procedures Rules 2006, with the exception of division 6.8.3
(Service – Magistrates Court), which is better suited to the service of
documents for civil proceedings.
New section
41D deals with the filing requirements for a CAN. A copy of a court attendance
notice served on a person must be filed as soon as practicable, but not less
than 14 days before the day stated in the notice for the person to appear before
a magistrate, or if the notice contains a consent signed by the person to appear
before a magistrate at a date earlier than 14 days after service of the
notice-as soon as practicable.
Section 41D also
deals with the need for the information in the CAN to be filed with a sworn
statement, in the event that a warrant is intended to be issued in the first
instance against the person. The court may issue a warrant pursuant to section
89 in the event that a person disobeys a CAN (as a CAN is taken to be a summons
for the purpose of section 89).
New section 41E
explains the relationship between the CAN and the pre-existing information and
summons method of commencing criminal proceedings. It confirms that the CAN is
additional to, and does not limit, any other provision of a Territory law about
an information or summons in relation to a criminal proceeding. This section
ensures that the CAN clearly establishes a new procedure for the commencement of
proceedings, whilst maintaining the current information and summons commencement
procedures.
Clause 11 Written statements may
be admitted in evidence, Section 90AA (3) (a) – changes the
current requirement in paragraph 90AA(3)(a) that written statements admitted in
evidence must be in the form of a statutory declaration. Instead of a statutory
declaration, which must be witnessed by a qualified person, the statement must
contain the endorsement set out in the amended paragraph. This amendment is
consistent with the approach in New South Wales. This approach is more
efficient and less time consuming, and is appropriate, given the criminal law
consequences of a false statement made to a court are equivalent under either
process. The requirements of paragraphs 90AA (3)(b) and (c) are maintained,
which include that the written statement must include a statement about the age
of the person making it, and a statement that, before the person signed it, the
person who made it read the statement or had it read to the
person.
The Rules Committee has broad rule-making powers under
the Court Procedures Act 2004 to determine additional appropriate
requirements for written statements admitted in
evidence.
Clause 12 Section 219AB
heading – changes the heading of section 219AB from
‘reference appeal following acquittal on indictment’ to
‘reference appeal in relation to proceeding’, in line with the
change to the requirement that a reference appeal may only be made in the event
of an acquittal.
Clause 13 Section
219AB(1) – amends subsection 219AB(1) to allow the Magistrates
Court, on application by the Attorney-General or the DPP, to hear and decide (by
way of a reference appeal), any question of law arising at or in relation to the
proceedings, irrespective of the outcome of the original proceedings. This
amendment is appropriate, given that important questions of law may be raised in
relation to any criminal proceedings, irrespective of the outcome of the
original proceedings. Critically, the protection afforded to the defendant that
a reference appeal does not affect the outcome of the original proceedings has
been maintained (refer clause 16).
Clause
14 Sections 219AB(2) – the term ‘trial’ has been
replaced with ‘proceeding’, to make it clear that the reference
appeal option is not limited to matters where a plea of not guilty has been
entered.
Clause 15 Sections 219AC(1)(a)
– the wording ‘at the trial’ has been replaced with
‘in the proceeding’, to make it clear that the reference appeal
process is not limited to matters where a plea of not guilty has been
entered.
Clause 16 Section 219AD –
the term ‘trial’ has been replaced with ‘proceeding’, to
make it clear that the reference appeal process is not limited to matters where
a plea of not guilty has been
entered.
Clause 17 Dictionary, note 2, new
dot point – inserts the term ‘proceeding’ into the
dictionary as an example of a commonly used term that is defined in the
dictionary of the Legislation Act 2001. This amendment is consequential
to the other amendments to the Magistrates Court Act
1930.
Clause 18 Dictionary, definition
of authorised person – amends the dictionary definition of
‘authorised person’ to include the meaning of ‘authorised
person’ for the purposes of the new CAN commencement
procedure.
Clause 19 Dictionary, new
definition of court attendance notice – inserts a definition of
‘court attendance notice’ into the dictionary, referring the reader
to new section 41B.
PART 5 – Supreme Court Act
1933
Clause 20 Legislation amended – pt 5
– states that this part amends the Supreme Court Act
1933.Clause 21 Appellate jurisdiction,
Section 37E (2) (b) – this amendment is consequential to the change of
heading to section 37S (refer clause
23).Clause 22 Orders on appeal, New section
37O(1A) and (1B) – inserts new sections 37O(1A) and (1B) to reflect
the High Court’s decision in
R v Hillier,[2] in
which the High Court commented on pt 2A, which governs the jurisdiction of the
Court of Appeal in appeals from convictions for indictable offences. The High
Court noted that pt 2A “said nothing about the principles governing the
exercise of the powers given by the Act [in relation to criminal appeals
jurisdiction]”.[3] Despite the
lack of explicit provision, the High Court determined that the criminal appeals
jurisdiction in the ACT is as broad as that of equivalent courts of appeal in
other jurisdictions, and interpreted pt 2A accordingly. This amendment brings
the appeals jurisdiction in line with that of all other Australian
jurisdictions,[4] by explicitly
stating that the Court of Appeal, on an appeal against conviction, must allow
the appeal if it considers that:•
the
verdict of the jury should be set aside on the ground that it is unreasonable,
or cannot be supported, having regard to the evidence;
or•
the judgment of the court before which
the appellant was convicted should be set aside on the ground of a wrong
decision of any question of law; or•
on any
other ground there was a miscarriage of
justice.The Court of Appeal may also dismiss an
appeal against conviction if it considers that the point raised by the appeal
might be decided in favour of the appellant, but no substantial miscarriage of
justice has actually occurred.Clause
23 Section 37S heading – changes the heading of section 37S from
‘reference appeal following acquittal on indictment’ to
‘reference appeal in relation to proceeding’, in line with the
change to the requirement that a reference appeal may only be made in the event
of an acquittal (refer clause 28).Clause
24 Section 37S(1) – amends subsection 37S(1) to allow the Supreme
Court, on application by the Attorney-General or the DPP, to hear and decide (by
way of a reference appeal), any question of law arising at or in relation to the
proceedings, irrespective of the outcome of the original proceedings. This
amendment is appropriate, given that important questions of law may be raised in
relation to any criminal proceedings, irrespective of the outcome of the
original proceedings. Critically, the protection afforded to the defendant that
a reference appeal does not affect the outcome of the original proceedings has
been maintained (see subsection
37S(6)).Clause 25 Section 37S (2) and (3)
– the term ‘trial’ has been replaced with
‘proceeding’, to make it clear that the reference appeal option is
not limited to matters where a plea of not guilty has been
entered.Clause 26 Section 37S (4) (a)
– the wording ‘at the trial’ has been replaced with
‘in the proceeding’, to make it clear that the reference appeal
option is not limited to matters where a plea of not guilty has been
entered.Clause 27 Section 37S (4) (b)
– the term ‘trial’ has been replaced with
‘proceeding’, to make it clear that the reference appeal option is
not limited to matters where a plea of not guilty has been
entered.Clause 28 Section 37S (6)
– the wording ‘at the trial’ has been replaced with
‘in the proceeding’, to make it clear that the reference appeal
option is not limited to matters where a plea of not guilty has been
entered.Clause 29 Dictionary, note 2, new
dot points – inserts the terms ‘indictment’ and
‘proceeding’ into the dictionary as examples of commonly used terms
that are defined in the dictionary of the Legislation Act 2001. This
amendment is consequential to the amendments to section 37S (reference
appeals).
[1]
(2007) 228 CLR
618.[2]
(2007) 228 CLR
618.[3]
Ibid at
632.[4]
For example, refer Criminal Appeal Act 1912 (NSW), s 6; Crimes Act
1958 (Vic), s 568.
[Index]
[Search]
[Download]
[Bill]
[[Help]]