Table of Contents
Background
Our client contacted our office for representation at Bacchus Marsh Court for an offence of failing to nominate driver of a motor vehicle upon request under section 60 of the Road Safety Act 1986 (Vic).
The events that preceded the request made under section 60 were that our client was that a vehicle registered to our client was travelling more than 100 kilometres over the applicable stretch of road on the outskirts of Bacchus Marsh.
The police requested pursuant to section 60 of the Road Safety Act that our client provide information that would lead to who was driving the car that they had previously tracked driving at a high speed. Such information would lead to serving the driver with excessive speed-related charges.
Our client refused to provide any information upon this request and was subsequently charged.
Our client was in his early twenties and had no previous court appearances (traffic or otherwise). He was employed.
What Are The Penalties for This Offence?
In this particular case our client faced a maximum of 20 penalty units or imprisonment for 2 months and a discretionary period of license disqualification. Read our article on this offence for a further explanation of the penalties for this offence.
What Happened at Court?
Due to the ,pandemic there was a delay in the filing of charges at court, and a further delay due to lengthy adjournments (attributed to the pandemic). The period between the offence date and the matter finalising as a plea of guilty was almost 2 years.
Submissions to the court addressed our client's age and the lack of previous court history. In addition, the Court was alerted to the fact that our client had secured ongoing full-time employment and had been employed for several months (he was not employed at the time of the offence).
The Court noted the impact of a period of disqualification but was also mindful of the penalties that would otherwise have applied for excessive speeding (a minimum of 12 months).
In weighing the competing sentencing considerations, the Court did not record a conviction, but to address general and specific deterrence the Court imposed a significant fine ($3000) and imposed a period of 6 months of license disqualification.
