Williamson v Hodgson [2010] WASC 95

In Williamson v Hodgson [2010] WASC 95 the appellant was charged for speeding and found guilty. He had numerous grounds of appeal, starting with the premise that section 45 of the Criminal Code (WA) affords him some defence to the speeding charge, that the magistrate erred in law by refusing his request for a trial by jury, that the provisions of the Road Traffic Act 1974 (WA), are unlawful because they are inconsistent with the United Nations International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, that the learned magistrate did not bring an impartial and unprejudiced mind to the case, and that his Honour swore at him. Further, he claims to have seceded from the Commonwealth of Australia and that he is not subject to the Road Traffic Code, and that the UN Covenant has given him this right, that the Magistrates Court did not have the lawful authority to try him since the passing of the Acts Amendment and Repeal (Courts and Legal Practice) Act 2003 (WA), and that the entity who issued him with the infringement notice had an Australian business number or ABN, and he was therefore being prosecuted by a corporation and not the police. The Court held that none of the grounds have a reasonable prospect of succeeding, and are devoid of any merit.

Click to access williamson-v-hodgson-2010-wasc-95.pdf

Leave a Reply