Ward v WA

(2011) 211 A Crim R 472; [2011] WASCA 172

Western Australia Court of Appeal

Built by Barristers,
For Australian Law.

See how it works

Interrogate

Catchwords

1. Criminal Law
2. › Conviction
3. › Jurisdiction
4. › Simple offence included on District Court indictment
5. › Whether District Court had jurisdiction to deal with simple offence
6. › Effect of jurisdictional error on validity of conviction
7. › Whether s 169(2) Criminal Procedure Act 2004 (WA) confers validity on determination made without jurisdiction
8. › Criminal Procedure Act 2004 (WA), s 169
1. Criminal Law
2. › Conviction
3. › Jurisdictional error
4. › Application to vary or set aside determination
5. › Nature and scope of discretion under s 169(3) and (4) Criminal Procedure Act 2004 (WA)
6. › Whether something more than mere fact of jurisdictional error required
7. › Criminal Procedure Act 2004 (WA), s 169(3), s 169(4)
1. Criminal Law
2. › Sentence
3. › Appeal against sentence
4. › Objective seriousness of offences
5. › Whether findings of sentencing judge open on the evidence
6. › Common purpose in unlawful assembly
7. › Sentencing for offence less serious than facts warrant
8. › De Simoni principle
9. › Criminal Code (WA), s 63, s 444, s 317(1)
10. › Sentencing Act 1995 (WA), s 6, s 7
1. Criminal Law
2. › Sentence
3. › Appeal against sentence
4. › Delay between charging and sentencing
5. › Whether sentencing judge erred in according little weight to delay of 19 months
6. › Principles governing delay as mitigating factor

Quick Take

Section 169(2) of the Criminal Procedure Act 2004 (WA) confers validity on a court's determination of a charge made as a result of jurisdictional error; such a determination has full force and effect and is not a nullity. An applicant seeking to vary or set aside such a determination under s 169(3) must point to some matter beyond the mere fact of jurisdictional error, such as material prejudice suffered as a consequence of the charge having been determined by a court without jurisdiction. The full scope of the s 169(4) discretion was left open for future determination.