DARREN MARK GARDNER In Person v COMMISSIONER OF POLICE [2024] SASCA 10

On Appeal from SUPREME COURT OF SOUTH AUSTRALIA (THE HONOURABLE JUSTICE STEIN) SCCRM-23-004761 Applicant: DARREN MARK GARDNER In Person Respondent: COMMISSIONER OF POLICE Counsel: MR W AMBROSE - Solicitor: CROWN SOLICITOR’S OFFICE Hearing Date/s: 14/02/2024 File No/s: SCCRM-23-026724 B SUPREME COURT OF SOUTH AUSTRALIA (Court of Appeal: Criminal) DISCLAIMER - Every effort has been made to comply with suppression orders or statutory provisions prohibiting publication that may apply to this judgment. The onus remains on any person using material in the judgment to ensure that the intended use of that material does not breach any such order or provision. Further enquiries may be directed to the Registry of the Court in which it was generated. GARDNER v POLICE [2024] SASCA 10 Judgment of the Court of Appeal (ex tempore) (The Honourable Justice Doyle, the Honourable Justice Bleby and the Honourable Justice David) 14 February 2024 APPEAL AND NEW TRIAL - PROCEDURE - SOUTH AUSTRALIA MAGISTRATES - APPEAL AND REVIEW - SOUTH AUSTRALIA - APPEAL TO SUPREME COURT Application for leave to appeal from a decision of a single judge of this Court dismissing the applicant’s appeal from findings of guilt in the Magistrates Court for breaches of the Motor Vehicles Act 1959 (SA). On 20 January 2022, the applicant was stopped by police while driving a Holden station wagon with Queensland number plates. The police officer conducted checks and determined that the number plates were allocated to a different vehicle and that the registration of the Holden station wagon had expired in October 2020. The applicant admitted that he had been unable to register the motor vehicle because of unpaid speeding fines; and that he had changed the number plates to disguise the vehicle. He said that he had continued to drive so as to work and support his family. He sought to defend the charges on the basis that he was not given a chance to contest his earlier speeding fines. The applicant was found guilty of driving an unregistered vehicle contrary to s 9(1) of the MVA, driving an uninsured motor vehicle contrary to s 102(1) of the MVA and driving a motor vehicle with an incorrect number plate contrary to s 47D(1)(a) of the MVA. Held, per the court: 1. The applicant’s proposed grounds of appear are entirely without merit. 2. The applications for an adjournment, a case stated and leave to appeal are refused. Motor Vehicles Act 1959 (SA) ss 9, 47D, 102, referred to. -- 1 of 4 -- -- 2 of 4 -- GARDNER v POLICE [2024] SASCA 10 Court of Appeal – Criminal: Doyle, Bleby and David JJA 1 THE COURT (ex tempore): The applicant seeks leave to appeal from a decision of a single judge of this Court dismissing his appeal from findings of guilt in the Magistrates Court for breaches of the Motor Vehicles Act 1959 (SA) (MVA).1 2 Before addressing the application for leave to appeal, it is necessary to address the applicant’s applications for an adjournment, and for the Court to state a case. The essence of the case the applicant seeks to have stated is that the State of South Australia was unlawfully established. There is no merit at all in the issues sought to be raised, and so the application for a case stated should be refused. No proper basis for an adjournment has been made out, and so that application should also be refused. 3 The applicant seeks a short extension of the time for filing his application for leave to appeal. As the application is not contested, and the short delay is explicable, the application for an extension of time will be granted. 4 Turning to the application for leave to appeal, it is opposed on the ground that it is entirely without merit. 5 The background to the applicant’s offending is uncontentious. The Magistrate made findings which are consistent with admissions made by the applicant prior to trial and at trial, and with concessions made by his solicitor on the appeal before the single judge. 6 On 20 January 2022, the applicant was stopped by police on Main Road in Willunga while driving a Holden station wagon with Queensland number plates. The police officer conducted checks and determined that the number plates were allocated to a different vehicle. The registration of the Holden station wagon had expired in October 2020. When asked questions, the applicant admitted the vehicle was not registered in South Australia and said that it was registered with a website called ‘Common Law Earth’. The applicant told the police officer that he had been unable to register the motor vehicle because of unpaid fines; and that he had changed the number plates to disguise the vehicle. He said that he had continued to drive so as to work and support his family. 7 Unsurprisingly, given the admitted conduct, the applicant was charged and found guilty of driving an unregistered vehicle on a road contrary to s 9(1) of the MVA, driving an uninsured motor vehicle on a road contrary to s 102(1) of the 1 Gardner v Police [2023] SASC 95. -- 3 of 4 -- [2024] SASCA 10 The Court 2 MVA and driving a motor vehicle with an incorrect number plate contrary to s 47D(1)(a) of the MVA. 8 The gravamen of the applicant’s complaints at trial, on appeal, and in now seeking permission to appeal, is that he ought to have been afforded an adjournment or some other opportunity to contest his earlier speeding fines. The applicant contends that, whilst he did not pay the fines, if he had been given an opportunity to contest those fines, he would have succeeded in doing so, the fines would not have been issued, his licence would not have been suspended, and he would have been able to register the Holden station wagon. 9 However, the obvious difficulty with the applicant’s complaints is that regardless of whether or not there might have been some basis for having the earlier speeding fines withdrawn or set aside, this would not provide the applicant with any defence or answer to any of the offences for which he has been convicted in these proceedings. The circumstances which led to the applicant failing to register or insure the vehicle are irrelevant to whether, at the relevant time, he was driving an unregistered and uninsured vehicle. They are also irrelevant to whether he was driving with incorrect number plates. 10 It follows that there was no basis for the Magistrate to adjourn the proceedings. Nor has any other error in the Magistrate’s reasons or conclusions been identified. 11 It also follows that the applicant has not identified any basis for impugning the single judge’s dismissal of his appeal from the decision of the Magistrate. 12 The application for leave to appeal should be dismissed. 13 The Court orders that: • the application for an adjournment (FDN 13) is refused; • the application for a case stated (FDN 15) is refused; • the application for an extension of the time within which to seek leave to appeal is granted; • the application for leave to appeal is refused. -- 4 of 4 --