Federal Court of Australia
DEFENCE FORCE DISCIPLINE APPEAL TRIBUNAL
Rogers v Chief of Navy [2002] ADFDAT 1
CRIMINAL LAW - jurisdiction practice and procedure - filing of information, presentment, or indictment – sufficiency of charge - no requirement to plead all elements of offence charged CRIMINAL LAW - jurisdiction practice and procedure – filing of information, presentment, or indictment - averments - uncertainty, duplicity and ambiguity - course of conduct constituted by a series of closely related events not duplicitous DEFENCE AND WAR - offences by members of the forces and persons liable to serve – behaving in a manner likely to prejudice the discipline of the defence force - whether conduct prejudicial - sexual relationship with female subordinate Defence Force Discipline Act 1982 (Cth) s 60
Defence Force Discipline Rules 1985, (Cth) Rule 9
R v Tearse [1945] KB 1 referred to
Director of Public Prosecutions v Merriman [1973] AC 584 at 607 referred to S v The Queen (1989) 168 CLR 266 applied
Walsh v Tattersall (1996) 188 CLR 77 referred to
R v F (1996) 90 A Crim R 356 applied
Chief of General Staff v Stuart (1995) 133 ALR 513 at 535 applied LIEUTENANT ADRIAN ROGERS v CHIEF OF NAVY DFDAT No 6 of 2001
HEEREY J (President), UNDERWOOD J (Deputy President) and
DUGGAN J (Member) SYDNEY 25 JULY 2002 DEFENCE FORCE DISCIPLINE
APPEAL TRIBUNAL DFDAT No 6 OF 2001
IN THE MATTER OF THE DEFENCE FORCE DISCIPLINE APPEALS ACT 1955 AND DEFENCE FORCE DISCIPLINE ACT 1982
BETWEEN: LIEUTENANT ADRIAN ROGERS
APPELLANT
AND: CHIEF OF NAVY
RESPONDENT
TRIBUNAL: HEEREY J (President), UNDERWOOD J (Deputy President) and DUGGAN J (Member)
DATE OF ORDER: 25 JULY 2002
WHERE MADE: SYDNEY
THE TRIBUNAL ORDERS THAT: 1. The appeal is dismissed. DEFENCE FORCE DISCIPLINE
APPEAL TRIBUNAL DFDAT No 6 OF 2001
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