MJM v BNZ

[2025] WASCA 156

Western Australia Court of Appeal

Built by Barristers,
For Australian Law.

See how it works

Interrogate

Catchwords

1. Criminal Law
2. › Road traffic offences
3. › Breath testing
4. › Failure to comply with requirement to provide breath sample
5. › Directions element
6. › Whether directions as to how to supply breath sample were given
7. › Whether directions may be combination of words and conduct
8. › Road Traffic Act 1974 (WA), ss 66, 67A(1), 67(2)
1. Appeal
2. › Criminal appeal
3. › Appeal against conviction
4. › Leave to appeal
5. › Whether primary judge erred in finding directions element established
6. › Whether findings on sufficiency of directions in other cases constitute binding precedent

Quick Take

The 'directions element' of breath test offences under ss 66, 67A(1) and 67(2) of the Road Traffic Act 1974 (WA) requires only that the person was told what to do to supply the sample; directions may be given by a combination of words and conduct assessed in all the circumstances, and no particular form of words is required.

Case Details

Citation[2025] WASCA 156

CourtWASCA

JurisdictionWestern Australia

Unlock so much more with Barrister AI

The full text is available to signed-in members.

Relies on5

2024MJM v BNZWASC 416
2007DPP v BoltonNSWSC 1030
Lester v PoliceSASCFC 123
and 2 more after sign-in

Create free account

Already have an account? Sign in