Brighton v Will [2020] NSWSC 435

Supreme Court New South Wales

Medium Neutral Citation: Brighton v Will [2020] NSWSC 435 Hearing dates: 3 April 2020 Date of orders: 23 April 2020 Decision date: 23 April 2020 Jurisdiction: Common Law Before: Rothman J Decision: (1) To the extent necessary, leave to appeal is granted.

(2) The appeal against the conviction is allowed.

(3) The conviction is quashed.

(4) The charges preferred against Daniel Brighton of two Counts of serious cruelty to a dog in contravention of s 530(1) of the Crimes Act 1900 (NSW) are dismissed.

(5) No order as to costs.

(6) Either party may apply for a different order as to costs within seven (7) days of the date of judgment. Any party affected by such an application may respond within seven (7) days of the receipt of the application. Any such application and response shall be filed by email to the Associate of Justice Rothman and such application shall be dealt with on the papers. Catchwords: CRIME – Appeal against conviction – cruelty to animal contrary to s 530 of the Crimes Act – construction of s 530 and, in particular, s 530(2) – "pest animals", "extermination" to be given ordinary meaning – animal killed and treated cruelly was one of two (2) pest animals – appellant exterminating pest animal – conviction quashed

APPEAL – appeal from Local Court – question of law alone – error to give ordinary words a technical means and thereby extend the reach of criminal offence – error is error of law alone Legislation Cited: Companion Animals Act 1998 (NSW) Consumer, Trader and Tenancy Tribunal Act 2001 (NSW) Crimes Act 1900 (NSW) Crimes (Appeal and Review) Act 2001 (NSW) Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999 (NSW) Criminal Appeal Act 1912 (NSW) Evidence Act 1999 (NSW) Interpretation Act 1987 (NSW) Local Land Services (Wild Dogs) Pest Control Order 2015 (NSW) Cases Cited: Alramadan v Director of Public Prosecutions (NSW) [2007] NSWCCA 322 Australian Gas Light Coast Co v Valuer-General (1940) SR (NSW) 126 Azzopardi v Tasman UEB Industries Ltd (1985) 4 NSWLR 139 Browne v Dunn (1893) 6 R 67 CIC Insurance Ltd v Bankstown Football Club Ltd (1997) 187 CLR 384; [1997] HCA 2 Collector of Customs v AGFA-Gevaert Ltd (1996)186 CLR 389; [1996] HCA 36 Collector of Customs v Pozzolanic Enterprises Pty Ltd (1993) 43 FCR 280; [1993] FCA 322 Comptroller-General of Customs v Pharm-A-Care Laboratories Pty Ltd (2020) 94 ALJR 182; [2020] HCA 2 Cranbrook School v Woollahra Municipal Council (2006) 66 NSWLR 379; [2006] NSWCA 155 Deal v Father Pius Kodakkathanath (2016) 258 CLR 281; [2016] HCA 31 Dinsdale v The Queen (2000) 202 CLR 321; [2000] HCA 54 Director General Department of Land and Water Conservation v Bailey [2003] NSWCCA 361 Director of Public Prosecutions (Cth) v JM (2013) 250 CLR 135; [2013] HCA 30 Dyers v The Queen (2002) 210 CLR 285; [2002] HCA 45 Ex parte Purcell (1907) 7 SR (NSW) 432 Ex parte Zietsch; Re Craig (1944) 44 SR (NSW) 360 Gibb v Federal Commissioner of Taxation (1966) 118 CLR 628; [1966] HCA 74 Haider v JP Morgan Holdings Aust Ltd t/as JP Morgan Operations Australia Ltd [2007] NSWCA 158 House v The King (1936) 55 CLR 499; [1936] HCA 40 Kelly v The Queen (2004) 218 CLR 216; [2004] HCA 12 Kostas v HIA Insurance Services Pty Ltd [2007] NSWSC 315 Krishna v Director of Public Prosecutions (NSW) (2007) 178 A Crim R 220; [2007] NSWCCA 318 L&B Linings Pty Ltd v WorkCover Authority of New South Wales [2011] NSWSC 474 L&B Linings Pty Ltd v WorkCover Authority of New South Wales [2012] NSWCA 15 Milhelic v R [2019] NSWCCA 2 NSW Associated Blue-Metal Quarries Ltd v Federal Commissioner of Taxation (1956) ALR 286; [1956] HCA 80 Ormwave Pty Ltd v Smith [2007] NSWCA 210 Project Blue Sky Inc v Australian Broadcasting Authority (1998) 194 CLR 355; [1998] HCA 28 R v Einfeld [2009] NSWSC 119 RPS v The Queen (2000) 199 CLR 620; [2000] HCA 3 Scott v Cawsey (1907) 5 CLR 132; [1907] HCA 80 Tuck & Sons v Priester (1887) 19 QBD 629 The King v Adams (1935) 53 CLR 563; [1935] HCA 62 Texts Cited: Arthur Delbridge, Macquarie Dictionary (3rd ed, 1997) Glanville Williams, Salmond on Jurisprudence (11th ed, 1947, Sweet and Maxwell) Category: Principal judgment Parties: Daniel Brighton (Plaintiff) Natalie Will (RSPCA Inspector) (Defendant) Representation: Counsel: S Odgers SC & M Sahade (Plaintiff) L Hutchinson (Defendant)