Kobylski v Cole [2006] QDC 308

Kobylski v Cole [2006] QDC 308

“The relevant facts in respect of each of the five sets of appeals are remarkably similar. The appellant, on each occasion, was intercepted by police while driving a motor vehicle.

On each occasion the appellant asserted that the motor vehicle he was driving was registered with an organisation known as UPMART Victoria and that the appellant had paid a single sum of $400 for lifelong registration for the vehicle. It appears that on each occasion what purported to be “number plates” had been provided by UPMART The driver’s licence which the appellant had with him was also (he asserted) purchased for $200 from UPMART Victoria and (the appellant asserts) was valid for life.

It is clear, Mr Kobylski, is a resident in Queensland, is subject to the laws of Queensland, and has, in law, no basis for the submission that he is not subject to the relevant laws of Queensland in respect of vehicle registration, compulsory third party insurance, driver licensing and the possession of false registration plates.”

Click to access kobylski-v.-cole-2006-qdc-308.pdf

The applicant applied for an extension of time in which to apply for leave to appeal from the dismissal above in Kobylski v Queensland Police Service [2007] QCA 50. The application for extension of time was refused.

Click to access kobylski-v-queensland-police-service-2007-qca-50.pdf

The appellant then appealed against the conviction and sentence in Kobylski v Cole [2007] QDC 127. The court found the arguments were clearly “unmeritorious constitutional arguments” and accordingly dismissed the appeal, noting Mullins J statement in Kobylski v Queensland Police Service:

“The underlying conduct of the appellant that resulted in his conviction of the subject offences … was his failure to comply with the laws of the State of Queensland, which was his deliberate choice.”

Click to access kobylski-v-cole-2007-qdc-127.pdf