The adequacy of reasons given by a judge on a motion to review a magistrate's decision is assessed by reference to the issues the judge was required to address and the basis of the decision. Brief reasons are not necessarily inadequate if they disclose an independent review of the evidence, state the standard of proof, and identify the basis for the conclusion. The correct test for the proviso under s 110(2)(ab) of the Justices Act 1959 (Tas) requires an independent assessment of whether guilt was proved beyond reasonable doubt, not merely whether there was evidence upon which the magistrate could have found guilt — though this point was not determined on appeal.
The full text is available to signed-in members.