Minimum Disqualification for Exceed PCA

Exceed PCAThis is a case of drink driving whereby a client successfully received a minimum disqualification for Exceed PCA.

The offending was the client’s second driving offence under the Road Safety Act. The client had a Z condition on her licence and she had to have a zero BAC every time she drove. On one occasion when she was pulled over, her BAC was 0.022. She was charged under s.49 of the Road Safety Act.

Hester Kelly acted on her behalf at the Melbourne Magistrates’ Court. The charges were:

It was important for the client that she only receive the minimum driving disqualification (12 months). The matter proceeded as a plea hearing and the prosecution withdrew one charge. Plea submissions were made on the client’s behalf where her personal circumstances were highlighted, particularly the steps she had taken since being charged (undertaking a Road Safety awareness course).

The client ultimately received a minimum disqualification for the Exceed PCA charge. She was also sentenced without conviction to a moderate fine and was granted a stay of one month for payment of the fine. The client was very pleased with this outcome.


Hester KellyHester Kelly

Hester is based at our Melbourne office and was admitted to practice in 2014. She previously worked as an Associate to Judge Howard in the County Court of Victoria and was also a solicitor advocate at another Melbourne criminal law firm before becoming a member of Doogue + George.

Hester graduated with First Class Honours in Law in 2012 from Monash University, with a degree in Bachelor of Arts / Bachelor of Laws. She completed two internships at the Castan Centre for Human Rights Law and has volunteered with the HIV/Aids Legal Centre in Melbourne.

Visit this page to know more about Hester.

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 02/03/2017