Balmain Court Low Range DUI Lawyers – January 2015

Balmain Local Court – Low Range PCA – Section 10 – January 2015 from Balmain Traffic Lawyers

Hi, guys. My name is Josh Boorman. I’m from SydneyDrinkDriving.com.au.

Today, I just want to update you on a matter that I had a couple of weeks ago at Balmain Local Court. This was a matter where my client was charged with a low range PCA or DUI offence. The blood alcohol reading was 0.069. So it was more at the higher end of the low range category.

Subjective Facts About My Client

Basically, my client was a father of three young children. He had quite a high-paid job as a General Manager of a large publicly listed infrastructure company. He was the soul income earner for his three children and his wife. He was getting ready to take off overseas to work in the UK on secondment for around 12 months. Unfortunately, he wasn’t able to take the time out or to take six weeks off to complete the traffic offenders program. He was desperate to get a Section 10 in order to avoid a criminal conviction and maintain a drivers licence so that he could legally drive on an international drivers licence whilst he was living overseas, since he does spend a lot of time traveling overseas and around the world but for work.

Circumstances leading to the DUI Offence

The incident basically occurred when my client had gone over to a friend’s place to have an early dinner however not long after he arrived a rather emergent type of situation occurred while he was at his friend’s place.

When he and his friend heard some screams coming from the next door neighbour, they looked out to see that the next door neighbour had falling over and broken his arm. My client and his friend went to the aid of this fellow and assisted him, called the ambulance, and waited until the ambulance came to take his neighbour way to hospital. Now, this was quite a stressful situation that my client was just thrown in on this night. Afterwards, he went back to his friend’s place. They had their dinner and my client did consume three drinks in the space of an hour and a half. Certainly, he did not go there with the plan of drinking as many drinks as he did and certainly not in the short space of an hour and a half.

But due to the situation that he was thrown into with the neighbour, injuring himself, and the stress and anxiety that followed from that event, my client wasn’t thinking as clearly as he usually would and he drank these 3 drinks in quick succession over approximately 90 minutes. He then got into the car after dinner to drive home, didn’t get far down the street, was pulled over for a random breath test and blew in the low range category. Obviously, we know the end blood alcohol rating was 0.069. These were mitigating issues which are presented to the Court.

Evidence of proof

I was able to back up my submissions in relation to the emergency situation that my client’s friend’s neighbour was in by tendering medical documents to the Court just to show that these fellow did actually break his arm on the date, the same date, that my client was charged in around the same time and by also had the injured person to write a statement confirming that my client had been there on the night and assisted him while he was injured.

Basically, what I wanted to do was to present to the Court this evidence and the submissions to show that my client wasn’t thinking with a whole lot of clarity due to the situation. I also then wanted to look at my client’s traffic history and show the Court that this incident was very uncharacteristic of him. It was his first drink driving offence and it was his first major traffic offence and of course, he had no criminal convictions on his history.

Pleading mitigation 

So I wanted the Court to see that it was these extenuating features that were involved in this situation on the night that my client was caught that led to my client not thinking as clearly as he could have and making a decision which was obviously clouded due to those drinks and then get into the car to drive. I obviously, really pushed to the Court that it was very much out of my client’s character to do what he did. After making the submissions to the Court, I also showed the Court that my client didn’t have a long distance to drive. I was able to print out a map of where my client had been drinking where he was pulled over and where his house was. The intended route of his driving to his place was only a few kilometres away.

I was able to show the Court that the intended route was short and that there was a reduced risk of injury to others on the road and especially given the time of night, there was minimum traffic on the road. I also pointed to the police fact sheet, we did actually might mentioned that my client was very cooperative with police and that he did not appealed to be affected by the alcohol that he had consumed.

Traffic Offender Program Ultimatum

After making the submissions, the Magistrate of Balmain Local Court was insistent that my client went along and completed a traffic offenders program, and especially if he was really pushing hard to get a section 10 dismissal or the Section 10 good behaviour bond when no conviction would be recorded for this offence.

As I’ve mentioned before, unfortunately, the situation my client was in the next day after the Court appearance, he was flying out to the U.K. with his family to start a new role in the U.K. and taking six weeks off was just – it wasn’t going to work for him delaying that trip, the six weeks, to complete the traffic offenders program. So the Magistrate suggested that I go away. I speak to my client, see if I could make any arrangements for him to delay the trip. The Magistrate said she would stand the matter in the Courts list whilst I got further instructions from my client in relation to this issue.

I stood the matter in the list. I went outside with my client, discussed with him if there was absolutely any way that he could delay the trip. He said that they were plans that had been in place for quite some time. Tickets had been paid for. Accommodation had been organized over in the U.K. and it was just not something that he was able to put his family through in sending them over and then him going over related time. It was just impractical.

Debate with the Magistrate

So I had to go back before the Magistrate at Balmain Local Court and explain that it was just impractical for my client to do the traffic offender program. But in saying that, I then reiterated the strong points that I had already presented to the Court. Those were the facts that there was an emergency that my client was involved in. He acted very uncharacteristically on the night and certainly, if you have a look at his traffic history, there’s no sort of other indications that this was a behaviour that he had done in the past. He had a very clean record and the character references spoke highly of him. I also pushed the fact that he was a sole income earner for his family. They were going to the U.K., and any sort of conviction recorded on his history may hinder his ability to travel to certain countries in the future and drive a vehicle whilst he was living and working overseas.

There was a fair bit of debate back and forth between myself and the Magistrate asking “spit firing” questions at me about my client’s situation, what happened on the night and various other queries that she had in relation to my client’s matter.

Debate & argument with the Police Prosecutor

I was at the brink of persuading the Magistrate to issue a Section 10, a good behaviour bond for my client. The Magistrate then duly asked the prosecutor if the prosecutor had any objections to issuing a Section 10. This started a whole new debate between myself and the prosecutor because the prosecutor got up and had quite a lot to say. She went on for about five minutes submitting why my client should not be given the benefit of a Section 10 if he had not completed the traffic offenders program.

I was then able to provide a reply to the prosecutors submissions and we did go back and forth for another five to ten minutes arguing and debating the issues at hand. So it was quite a drawn out matter before the Magistrate. But at the end of the day, the Magistrate was of the view that this was a one-off type of incident despite the fact that the blood alcohol rating of 0.069 was at the higher end of low range, she did take on board my submissions and obviously, the evidence that was presented to the Court and did turn around and give my client a Section 10 albeit with quite a lengthy good behaviour bond of two years, which is the maximum period of a good behaviour bond that she could have given my client. By at the end of the day, he was not convicted, he was not fined. He did not lose his license and ultimately, we got the best result possible for my client given the situation.

Obtaining a Section 10 for Low Range Drink Driving

It was probably one of the hardest fought Section 10 results that I have got in the local court due to the fact that the Magistrate wanted my client to go and do the traffic offender program and that was just not an option for my client since he was heading overseas to live and work. So I was immediately faced with an uphill battle in persuading the Magistrate that he should be given a Section 10 without doing the Traffic Offenders Program. On top of this the raft of submissions that came from the prosecutor to not issue my client with the Section 10 was quite strong. So, not only did I have to provide all submissions to the Magistrate, but I also had to provide lengthy debate back and forth between the prosecutor and myself. I was very thankful and, of course, my client was very thankful that we were successful in persuading the Magistrate to issue a Section 10.

Professional legal information for DUI matters

So, guys, this is just another case of a drink driving matter that we appeared on in the local court in New South Wales. Of course, we appear in all local courts around Sydney for all drink driving and alcohol related traffic matters. Certainly, if you have been charged with one of these offences and would like to speak to someone about your situation and your offence, please feel free to give me a call, Josh Boorman, on 1300 941 900.

I’m happy to have a Free 1st Telephone Consultation with you to discuss your situation, the options you may have, and also, to explain to you what way can do for you in representing you in your local court drink driving matter.

First step you might want to take is actually going along and visiting our website, which is SydneyDrinkDriving.com.au. There is a whole raft of information there on drink driving laws, offences, results, blog posts, videos. There’s a whole heap of information surrounding drink driving cases and how we handle them. Certainly, that would be a good first part of the call for you to take to get a better understanding of the situation that you maybe in.

And certainly after that, as I’ve mentioned, give me a call. I’m happy to have a chat with you on 1300 941 900. Thanks, guys.

Speak to our DUI Lawyers – Josh Boorman Ph: 1300 941 900


Our DUI Lawyers can be contacted at:

Sydney Drink Driving Lawyers | DUI Solicitors NSW

14/362-370 Pitt Street
Sydney NSW 2000

Email: jboorman@boormanlawyers.com.au

NSW Drink Driving Information was written by Josh Boorman a Sydney Drink Driving Lawyer.

Joshua Boorman
Sydney Drink Driving Lawyers are experts in dealing with all drug and alcohol related Traffic Laws. We attend all courts in Sydney and the surrounding suburbs. Call (02) 9283 8622 or Email: sydneytrafficlawyers@gmail.com
Joshua Boorman
Joshua Boorman
About The Author

Joshua Boorman

Sydney Drink Driving Lawyers are experts in dealing with all drug and alcohol related Traffic Laws. We attend all courts in Sydney and the surrounding suburbs. Call (02) 9283 8622 or Email: sydneytrafficlawyers@gmail.com