Ryde City Council v Pedras

[2009] NSWCCA 248

NSW Court of Criminal Appeal

View on CaseLaw

Built by Barristers,
For Australian Law.

See how it works

Interrogate

Catchwords

1. Criminal Law
2. › Stated case
3. › Criminal Appeal Act 1912 (NSW), s 5B
4. › Form of stated case
5. › Whether questions submitted were questions of law
6. › Whether Court could add further question of law
7. › Whether stated case could be struck out for want of jurisdiction
1. Criminal Law
2. › Companion animals
3. › Dog in public place not under effective control
4. › Construction of s 13(2)(b) Companion Animals Act 1998 (NSW)
5. › Meaning of 'in charge of the dog at that time'
6. › Whether person not present at public place could be 'in charge of' dog
7. › Whether section requires physical presence at time and place of offence
1. Practice and Procedure
2. › Costs
3. › Unrepresented litigant
4. › Whether costs may be awarded for personal time or lost earnings
5. › Cachia v Hanes (1994) 179 CLR 403 applied
6. › Crimes (Appeal and Review) Act 2001 (NSW), s 70

Quick Take

Being 'in charge of' a dog for the purposes of s 13(2)(b) of the Companion Animals Act 1998 (NSW) requires the person to have particular responsibility for the dog's control when it is in the public place, not merely general care and control. A person who has been left with general care of a dog but is not present at the public place when the dog is found there is not 'in charge of the dog at that time'. The principle in Cachia v Hanes that costs do not include compensation for a litigant's personal time applies equally in criminal proceedings.