Client receives fine for drive disqualified and using mobile phones whilst driving

Our client had his licence suspended due to a prior drink drive matter. He is an owner of a construction business and on the day of the offending, an issue had arisen on a work site and an employee had to leave due to a family emergency. Our client was at the work site and decided to drive the work ute back to their premises, as there were many expensive tools in the back, which needed to be stored in a secure area. He was intercepted by the Police driving back to his office. He was also caught using a mobile phone whilst driving.

Kristina Kothrakis represented the client at the Melbourne Magistrates’ Court for the charges of:

The difficulty in this case was to persuade the Magistrate to accept that our client’s driving on this occasion was a one-off incident. Not having his licence further suspended was very important to our client, as his business was losing money dramatically due to him not being able to perform his normal role for an extended period of time. In order to achieve that result, we obtained many character references from employees which confirmed that he has not been using a vehicle at work. We also had letters from the business accountant confirming that the business was struggling financially. The Magistrate was ultimately persuaded, and gave us a modest fine and did not interfere with our client’s licence.

 


Kristina KothrakisKristina Kothrakis

Kristina has significant experience in criminal trials and also holds a degree in Science, majoring in Psychology, an invaluable area of knowledge, as many of her clients suffer from psychological disorders.

Kristina strives to achieve the best possible result for all her clients. Skilled, decisive and assertive, Kristina demonstrates dedication, care and professionalism at all times.

Visit Kristina’s profile to read more about her background and experience.

DISCLAIMER: This is a real case study of an actual case from our files. Details pertaining to the client have been changed to protect their privacy. The sentence imposed and the charge have not been altered. These case studies are published to demonstrate real outcomes and give an indication of possible tariffs in Court. We do not guarantee a similar case on these charges will get the same result. Please note that we post results at our discretion, therefore while many case studies are average results, others are notable for their exceptional outcomes. PUBLISHED 25/02/2013