General Civil Appeal – Insurance – Third-party Liability Insurance – Motor Vehicles – Compulsory Insurance Legislation – Uninsured Vehicles – Queensland – where an employee of the appellant was injured in an accident involving a mobile crane owned by the appellant – where the crane was not registered – where the respondent settled the action brought by the employee – whether the injury of the employee was one to which the statutory compensation scheme applies – whether the respondent was the proper defendant in the action brought by the employee – whether the appellant is liable to reimburse the respondent in respect of expenses incurred by it in settling the action – HELD: Appeal dismissed; Appellant to pay the respondent's costs of the appeal to be assessed on the standard basis

Application for Leave s 118 DCA (Civil) – Criminal Law – Jurisdiction, Practice and Procedure – Judgment and Punishment – Orders for Compensation, Reparation, Restitution, Forfeiture and Other Matters Relating to Disposal of Property – Compensation – Queensland – where District Court Judge awarded the present respondent $3,375 compensation under the Criminal Offences Victims Act 1995 (Qld), a reduction by one-half of the primary amount that was $6,750 – where the applicant seeks leave to appeal against the decision of the District Court, pursuant to s 118(3) of the District Court of Queensland Act 1967 (Qld) – where the applicant contends that the primary amount should be further reduced – where the applicant additionally contends that the respondent’s conduct precluded any award, because the respondent’s injury was caused by an offence to which the respondent was a party – whether the applicant should be granted leave to appeal – HELD: Application refused with costs

General Civil Appeal – Succession – Family Provision and Maintenance – Failure by Testator to Make Sufficient Provision for Applicant – Whether Applicant Left with Insufficient Provision – claims by spouse – where the appellant’s late husband made a will dividing his residuary estate evenly between the appellant and his three sons – where the appellant applied under s 41 of the Succession Act 1981 (Qld), contending that the deceased did not make adequate provision for her maintenance in his will – where the trial judge refused her application – where the appellant challenged the weight ascribed by the trial judge to various factors including the relationship between the appellant and the deceased, the relationship between the deceased and his sons, the care provided by the appellant to the deceased and an informal prenuptial agreement between the appellant and the deceased – whether the trial judge erred in determining that adequate provision was made for the maintenance and support of the appellant – Appeal dismissed with costs

General Civil Appeal – Statutes – Acts of Parliament – Interpreation – Rules of Construction – Generally – where the respondent was convicted in June 2000 of one count of maintaining a relationship of a sexual nature with a child under 12 in his care, one count of rape and three counts of indecent treatment of a child under the age of 12 in his care – where the respondent in October 2005 petitioned to the Governor for a pardon – where the appellant decided not to refer the respondent’s case to the Court of Appeal for consideration pursuant to s 672A Criminal Code 1899 (Qld) – where the respondent made an application for an order pursuant to s 39 Judicial Review Act 1991 (Qld) that the appellant give a statement of reasons – where the primary judge ordered that the appellant give the respondent a statement of reasons in relation to the decision not to refer the respondent’s case to the Court of Appeal – where Item 1 of Sch 2 Judicial Review Act 1991 (Qld) provides that reasons need not be given in relation to “decisions relating to the administration of criminal justice, and in particular–” – where the primary judge applied the ejusdem generis rule of statutory construction to come to the conclusion that the class of matters coming within Item 1 of Sch 2 was confined to “decisions relating to the investigation and trial of criminal offences” – whether the general introductory words of Item 1 of Sch 2 were restricted by the particular matters outlined in the item’s sub-paragraphs – whether a referral under s 672A can be categorised as a decision relating to the “administration of criminal justice”, HELD: Appeal allowed, Orders made by the primary judge on 12 February 2008 be set aside, Respondent pay the appellant’s costs of and incidental to this appeal and of the hearing at first instance on 12 February 2008

Criminal Law – Appeal and New Trial and Inquiry after Conviction – Appeal and New Trial – Interference with Discretion or Finding of Judge – Particular Matters – where appellant convicted of nine counts of possession of a counterfeit prescribed security – where trial judge ruled that proof that a document is a counterfeit prescribed security does not require proof of the existence at the relevant time of an actual prescribed security from which the counterfeit security had been created – whether the finding of the trial judge was erroneous – HELD: Appeal allowed; Verdict below set aside and in lieu thereof a verdict of not guilty entered

Sentence Application – Criminal Law – Appeal and New Trial and Inquiry After Conviction – Appeal and New Trial – Appeal Against Sentence – Appeal by Convicted Persons – Applications to Reduce Sentence – applicant sentenced to three years imprisonment with a parole release date fixed after 15 months on a plea of guilty to one count of unlawful wounding – applicant smashed beer glass into face of complainant – applicant's conduct unprovoked and unpremeditated – complainant scarred, but not disfigured – applicant of otherwise good character and remorseful – whether sentence manifestly excessive – HELD: The indictment presented to the Southport District Court be amended by correcting the spelling of the applicant's name to "MATTHEW KENNETH JONES", Application for leave to appeal granted, Appeal allowed, Set aside the sentence imposed at first instance, Instead, a sentence of 18 months imprisonment is substituted and a parole release date is fixed at 10 September 2008

Sentence Application – Criminal Law – Appeal and New Trial and Inquiry After Conviction – Appeal Against Sentence – Appeal by Convicted Persons – Applications to Reduce Sentence – When Granted – Particular Offences – Other Offences – where applicant pleaded guilty to one count of robbery in company and one count of wilfully and unlawfully damaging a taxi cab – sentenced to two years imprisonment for robbery and 12 months imprisonment for wilful damage – both periods of imprisonment wholly suspended for an operational period of two and a half years – ordered to pay $1000 compensation within three months – persistent course of threatening and intimidating conduct towards the taxi driver – the acts were not pre-meditated – both offenders were inebriated – no actual violence inflicted on the complainant and no weapons used – co-operation with police and full admissions – genuine remorse – both counts involved the ‘same act or omission’ – whether sentencing judge punished twice for same offence – sentence manifestly excessive – HELD: (by majority) - Allow the appeal, Set aside the sentences imposed, Impose a sentence of imprisonment of 18 months fully suspended for an operational period of 18 months in relation to count 1, Convict but not further punish in relation to count 2.

Sentence Application – Criminal Law – Appeal and New Trial and Inquiry After Conviction – Appeal and New trial – Appeal Against Sentence – Appeal by Convicted Persons – Applications to Reduce Sentence – applicant convicted on plea of guilty to eight counts of rape and two counts of indecent dealing with a circumstance of aggravation – victim was the applicant’s six year old step son – judge sentenced the applicant to 10 years imprisonment on each count and declared the applicant convicted of a serious violent offence – applicant extensively co-operated with the authorities, including admitting to then unknown offences – applicant pleaded guilty to ex officio indictment – whether sentence was manifestly excessive – HELD: Application for leave to appeal granted, Appeal allowed, Sentence imposed at first instance set aside, On each count of rape the applicant is sentenced to eight years imprisonment and declared convicted of a serious violent offence, On each count of indecent dealing with a circumstance of aggravation the applicant is sentenced to five years imprisonment, Pursuant to s 161 of the Penalties and Sentences Act 1992 (Qld), it is declared that 458 days spent in pre-sentence custody between 12 September 2006 and 13 December 2007 be deemed time already served under the sentence.

Sentence Application – Criminal Law – Jurisdiction, Practice and Procedure – Judgment and Punishment – Sentence – Juvenile Offenders – Relevant Principles – applicant pleaded guilty to two counts of assault occasioning bodily harm in company – applicant involved in fracas where two innocent passers-by were set upon by large group of teenagers – applicant held on to fence while he jumped on the head of the complainant, who had been knocked to the ground – applicant served 91 days pre-sentence custody – applicant had begun to rehabilitate before sentence – applicant had educational and employment prospects – applicant ashamed and remorseful – judge sentenced applicant to 15 months detention, to be released after serving 50 per cent of the detention on a supervised release order – convictions were recorded – principles of sentencing juvenile offenders – whether detention imposed was appropriate at all and for the least time justified in the circumstances – whether sentence was manifestly excessive – HELD: Application for leave to appeal granted, Appeal allowed, Sentence imposed at first instance set aside, Instead, on each count order under s 180 Juvenile Justice Act that the applicant be sentenced to 175 days detention and that he be placed on 12 months probation on the usual terms and conditions under s 193 Juvenile Justice Act together with the further conditions that he undergo such counselling or treatment as directed by the chief executive for substance abuse and in particular alcohol abuse, and that under s 193(3) he comply with the probation order outside the State, The 91 days pre-sentence custody from 19 November 2007 to 18 February 2008 is declared as time served under the detention order, The applicant's legal representatives are directed to explain to him the purpose and effect of these orders under s 158 Juvenile Justice Act