Federal Court of Australia
a rcvool Gd. wdeE
CATCHWORODS
Defence Force Discipline appeal - admissibility of evidence of reconstruction - weight to be accorded to such evidence - whether basic premises were themselves accurate - no
substantial miscarriage of justice
Practice and procedure - terms of charge and particulars - necessity to inform an accused of the specific offence alleged against him - particulars of offence incorrect - material irregularity but no substantial miscarriage of
justice
IN THE MATTER of the Defence Force Discipline Appeals Act AND IN THE MATTER of an Appeal against conviction from General Court Martial of 550166 Sergeant Carl Stephen
St John
DFDAT No.1 of 1989
Members: The Hon. Sir Edward Woodward (President) The Hon. Mr Justice W.J.E. Cox (Deputy President)
The Hon. Mr Justice J.F. Gallop (Member)
26 June 1989 Canberra
IN THE DEFENCE FORCE )
DISCIPLINE APPEAL TRIBUNAL )
) No. DFDAT 1 of 1989
Members: The Hon.
The Hon. The Hon.
26 June 1989 Canberra
IN THE MATTER of the Defence
Force Discipline Appeals Act AND IN THE MATTER of an Appeal against conviction from General Court Martial of
550166 Sergeant Carl Stephen St John
REASONS FOR JUDGMENT
Sir Edward Woodward (President) Mr Justice W.J.E. Cox (Deputy President) Mr Justice J.F. Gallop (Member)
This is an appeal pursuant to s.20(1) of the Defence Force Discipline Appeals Act 1955 against a conviction by General Court Martial on 15 December 1988 at Victoria Barracks, Sydney. The appellant was convicted of
an offence against s.36(1) of the Defence Force Discipline
Act 1982. Section 36(1) reads:
"(1) A person, being a defence member or a defence civilian, who, in or in connection with -
(a) the operation, handling, servicing or storage; or
(b) the giving of directions with respect to the operation, handling, servicing or storage,
of a ship, aircraft, or vehicle or a weapon, missile, explosive or other dangerous thing or equipment, intentionally, by act or omission, behaves in a manner that causes, or is likely to cause, the death of, or grievous bodily harm to, another person is guilty of an offence for which the maximum punishment is imprisonment for 10 years."
We try to embed the page this law was scraped from. If the site blocks framing, you still get the link and a local excerpt.
Last checked with source on —
Checking whether the official page can be embedded…
Plain-English simplify of this law: a short summary, key points, and both sides of the argument. Generated on first view via Replicate, then cached. Vote on what helps your study.
No study brief is cached for this law yet. Sign up to generate a plain-English brief.
Sign up to generate