› submissions that appellant had capacity to pay a fine rejected by the sentencing magistrate
› failure to provide an opportunity to the appellant to call evidence in relation to the appellant’s capacity to pay fines
› a real possibility that the assumption made by the learned magistrate contributed to the conclusion not to impose a fine
› appeal allowed
Justices Act s 177(2)
Sentencing Act
Australian Broadcasting Tribunal v Bond [1990] HCA 33; (1990) 170 CLR 321; Development Consent Authority v Phelps [2010] NTCA 3; R v Tait (1979) 24 ALR 473; Van Toorenburg v Westphal [2011] NTSC 31; followed
Case Details
Citation[2013] NTSC 1
CourtNTSC
JurisdictionNorthern Territory
Unlock so much more with Barrister AI
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 2 later cases that cite this judgment.
1 of the 2 citing cases carry a classified treatment. How each court treated it is available to signed-in members.