Ultimately, Fines Victoria found in our client’s favour and granted the Enforcement Review, overturning the infringements and the suspension of our client’s licence.

This was an excellent result, given that our client would not be able to work if he could not regain his licence, as he needed a driver’s licence for his employment.

The right outcome ensued because of our solicitor’s detailed preparation and thorough analysis. This case highlights the importance of seeking legal advice immediately upon becoming aware of unpaid infringements, as strict time limits apply

In court, our solicitor successfully proved that the client had only recently become aware of these outstanding matters and did not have the vehicle; therefore, he should be given time to nominate the infringements. The Magistrate agreed and gave our client an additional 28 days to nominate the driver for the outstanding infringements.

This was an excellent result, given that our client would not be able to work if he were unable to regain his licence.

This result was the product of creative thinking and quick problem-solving, which identified what needed to be demonstrated to the court to achieve the desired outcome. It is also evident that seeking immediate legal advice upon becoming aware of unpaid infringements is crucial, as strict time limits apply. Had our client waited longer, the process would have been much lengthier and more difficult to reopen the matters.

The matter was eventually resolved during case conferencing, with the prosecution offering to withdraw all charges on the first court date, on the basis that our client would not pursue any application for costs against them.

The client would have had to take the matter to a hearing to obtain costs. Our client wanted the matter finalised and accepted the withdrawal.

This case was resolved favourably for our client due to our lawyer’s thorough understanding of the law regarding complicity. Getting the prosecution to withdraw all charges without requiring a hearing was an outstanding outcome for our client.

In the end, the Magistrate was persuaded by our solicitor’s extensive submissions and found that the Applicant’s case, taken at its highest, could not substantiate any grounds of prohibited behaviour and would not justify the making of an order, and therefore struck out the applications. It was found that the application was frivolous, given that there was no way for the application to succeed.

This was an excellent result, given that our clients would have had to spend significant time and money contesting the order or face the prospect of consenting to it. If an order had been put in place, it would have put them at risk of allegations of breach that could lead to criminal charges.

This result was the product of creative thinking and quick problem-solving, which identified what needed to be demonstrated to the court to achieve the desired outcome. It required extensive preparation of persuasive submissions on the relevant law as to why the application should be struck out. This case highlights why hiring a lawyer in these situations can save you time, money and stress.

The client was found suitable for a CCO; however, the court also expressed its wish to impose a sentence of imprisonment.

Our solicitor further submitted to the court that rehabilitation should be the main sentencing principle. These submissions pointed to the client’s youth, honest and open cooperation with the police, admissions, and the level of remorse indicated by the early plea of guilty.

The court ultimately agreed and sentenced the client to a Community Correction Order with treatment and community work conditions, without a period of imprisonment.

This was a great outcome achieved by in-depth knowledge of the requisite sentencing principles each court is bound to consider in its decision-making.

Upon returning to Drug Court, these reports were put to the Magistrate, as well as submissions expressing his strong motivation to rid drugs from his life once again, clean drug screens that showed that he had already begun to take these steps on his own, and letters from family members and friends that spoke of his battles and determination to do better.

The Prosecution did not oppose a Drug Court sentence being handed down to the client. They accepted that such an order would benefit our client and the community more than a sentence of imprisonment and would ultimately assist in preventing the client from offending. The Magistrate agreed that such a sentence was appropriate, and the client was given a Drug Treatment Order, in lieu of a 12-month imprisonment sentence.

This result was immensely positive for the client. It enabled him to stay at home with his family whilst he attended rehabilitation, and to undergo detox and counselling sessions aimed at educating him and helping him to recover from drug addiction. This sentence also allowed the client to continue to assist in taking care of his mother and his children, and avoid spending time in prison, so long as his drug screens remained negative.

We thoroughly gathered reports on the client’s background and health circumstances in this matter. With such materials, we sought the best possible result, which was a therapeutic order.