Call UsBook Now

Facebook users ridicule North Queensland Police drug bust, but there’s a detail they may be missing

Facebook users ridicule North Queensland Police drug bust, but there’s a detail they may be missing

FACEBOOK users on a North Queensland based page have ridiculed a drug bust by Mackay Police, after a photo of about $50 worth cannabis was put up on their blog.

As one user of the Mackay based crime page sarcastically posted: “Good job. You got a stick off the streets…Street value $30k saved over 100 lives.”

And another user posted: “It’s only weed no big deal try and get the harder drugs off the streets.”

The sentiment that users of cannabis should not face court action and a criminal record has led to law reform in at least one Australian jurisdiction.

For example, the Australian Capital Territory has taken significant steps to reform the laws which govern possession of small amounts of cannabis.

Under ACT law the maximum penalty for possession of less than 50 grams of cannabis is a fine of about $210.

Residents are also allowed to grow two cannabis plants – although this can’t be done using hydroponics.

Get in contact with one of our lawyers for a free chat.

Indeed, residents whose cannabis is seized by police can even apply to have it given back – if they’re not charged with a criminal offence and get compensation from the government if it’s destroyed. The reforms have been lauded by many as worthwhile and progressive, including Dr David Caldicott, an emergency physician and senior lecturer at the Australian National University’s College of Health and Medicine who told the ABC in March this year: “The rest of the states are being dullards and laggards as far as introducing drug law reform is concerned.”

Click the links below to read the other posts on our blog:

> Man’s surprising defence to drink-driving

> Your rights if police stop you for a random drug search

>Five things you should know before posting on social media

“There are people, of course, who think that throwing the book legally at young people who have been found in possession of drugs in some way will change the equation, but globally we know that’s a complete toss — there’s absolutely no evidence for that whatsoever.”

In contrast in Queensland possessing cannabis is illegal and carries a maximum sentence of 20 years.

Strategic Lawyers act for clients anywhere in North Queensland get in touch here.

However, while there may be some validity to the argument for law reform in this space, Strategic Lawyers’ key criminal solicitor Anthony Sturgeon pointed out people on Facebook may have been missing an important detail.

“You do see a lot of small-time cannabis possession charges before the courts and there are questions about the use of the court’s time and police resources in cases of that nature,” Mr Sturgeon said.

“However, in the case in question police are alleging those accused also had harder drugs.

“And they have charged those involved with offences such as supplying methylamphetamines and possessing a category R weapon.”

“We are strong believers in drug law reform, and in excellent defences for our clients charged with such offences”.

All the happenings here at Strategic Lawyers

All the happenings here at Strategic Lawyers

It’s hard to believe we are already well into the second half of 2018 and for the Strategic Family this year is shaping up to be our best yet!

Certainly, the biggest recent personal announcement was the marriage of our much-loved legal-secretary Casey Blanco (nee Wilson). Casey was married in a beautiful ceremony at the Carl Von Martius Way followed by a huuuuge reception at the Ville.

In other big news our family lawyer Robert Ballais took the plunge and bought his first house. With construction set for completion in three weeks Rob’s quietly getting very excited about grabbing the keys.

Our Queen of all things accounts, Francina de Chazal – or Anci as we call her here at the Firm – celebrated her 60th Birthday, in late June. Happy birthday Anci!

Anci at her 60th birthday

Our senior lawyer, Anthony Sturgeon recently found out that he will be an uncle. He’s thrilled to introduce his new niece to the joy of Nerf guns – no matter what her parents think.

The team at Longboards Bar and Grill

Our principal lawyer Justin Ireland celebrated his birthday in July and even took the team out for wings and beers. Justin, a very proud dad, enjoys getting out and about  with his daughter Grace – it’s alarming how quickly she is growing up – as you’ll see in the photo below. Known to sit on her Dad’s lap and type away on the keyboard, she lights up the office whenever she comes into the firm.

Justin’s daughter Grace

Our ace commercial lawyer Steve Hodgson (aka Harvey Specter) is settling into Townsville life very nicely after moving to the Firm last year. Steve also just became an uncle and recently made the trip south to meet his new niece.

A new addition to the team, Lachlan Thompson, started as our Firm’s marketing manager, in June. Lachlan, a former journalist, and his young family moved to Townsville from the Sunshine Coast, in November.

Lachlan with his wife Jenna and son Albie

And finally, it’s time for us to bid a very sad farewell to our paralegal Madeleine Jacobs – who’s landed a very prestigious gig as a judge’s associate. Madeleine will also be getting married in September after announcing her engagement last year.

When Australian courts recognise polygamous marriages

When Australian courts recognise polygamous marriages

While the political controversy around gay marriage means the vast majority of Australians are aware of the law for same-sex couples, very few people know what happens when the courts consider cases of polygamy.

Polygamy means a marriage where there is more than two people – either a man with multiple wives, or a woman with more than one husband.

Long before Australia’s political debate was dominated by the question of whether or not we should legalise gay marriage, Section 6 of the Family Law Act had instructed the country’s courts to recognise polygamous marriages.

That said the legislation does not recognise all polygamous marriages and polygamous marriages entered into on Australian soil are not legally valid.

And it is important to note that getting married to two people, in Australia, is still an offence under the Marriage Act.

However, when a man has taken more than one wife, or a woman has more than one husband, in a foreign country, the courts will, in some cases, recognise those marriages.

For example, in 2014, the Full Family Court of Australia heard a case where a couple fought over whether or not a polygamous marriage which had been sanctioned by the Iranian government, was valid under Australian law.

The question was complicated by the fact the Howard Government had, in 2004, inserted a new definition of marriage into the Marriage Act.

That new definition, which was aimed at preventing same-sex marriage, said marriage was the: “union of a man and woman to the exclusion of all others”.

Today, that definition has now been and instead of mentioning gender it now just talks about a union between two people – as a result of Australia voting “Yes” to same-sex marriage in the November 2017 referendum.

However it was the phrase: “to the exclusion of all others” which raised questions about how the Family Law Act could recognise polygamous marriages.

In the case in question it was held that a polygamous marriage, entered into in a foreign country, was still valid despite the Howard Government’s changes.

 

 

When the courts will intervene to rewrite a will

When the courts will intervene to rewrite a will

Where there’s a will it won’t always decide the way.

The reality of wills is, in many instances, the courts will intervene to reallocate the assets of a person who has passed-away.

While this has drawn criticism in some quarters – with media commentators taking issue with the court’s powers to overrule a person’s wishes – it also means relatives of the deceased are not treated unfairly.

Get in touch with one of our solicitors now

For example, in 2012 the New South Wales courts reinterpreted a mother’s will after she chose to leave her home to two of her children and disinherit a third. In the case in question two of those children lived with their mother while the third child had been estranged from her for 38 years.

The estranged daughter was eventually given $175,000 from an estate worth just over $600,000.

Key to the court’s decision was the sense that the estranged daughter was unemployed and in need of financial help.

Click the links below to read the other posts on our blog:

> The 11 things you should know before getting a divorce

>Man’s surprising defence to drink-driving

Your rights if police stop you for a random drug search

>Five things you should know before posting on social media

In a contrasting case, in 2017, the Supreme Court of Queensland upheld that a man’s unsent text message disinheriting his wife – in favour of his brother and nephew – was a valid will.

In the unusual case the man in question had committed suicide, however, the court found this was insufficient evidence to find he was mentally incapacitated when he drafted the text.

The court placed a heavy amount of weight on the specific nature of the text – it referred to the man’s house and superannuation and had been labelled as a will.

“It’s important to note the courts won’t just jump in and reinterpret any will – people looking to challenge one have to successfully file a family provision application to show cause that a court should reinterpret the will,” Steve Hodgson from Strategic Lawyers said.

“And if there’s a take-away message from the caselaw it is that it’s always worth getting real legal help.

“There are ways to ensure that your will can be strengthened against a potential family provision application, if you believe that a disgruntled relative may challenge it.”

This would mean your wishes are followed after you pass-away.

“The legislation provides a mechanism that allows any interested party – a spouse, child, or a dependent – to challenge a will if proper provision was not made to them by the will-maker,” Mr Hodgson said.

“However, a legal challenge of that nature does require expert legal advice to ensure it is made properly or defended properly as the case may be.”