Federal Court of Australia
DEFENCE FORCE DISCIPLINE APPEAL TRIBUNAL
Angre v Chief of Navy (No 2) [2016] ADFDAT 2 Appeal from: General Court Martial
File number: DFDAT 3 of 2015
Judges: TRACEY (PRESIDENT), LOGAN (DEPUTY PRESIDENT) AND BRERETON JJ
Date of judgment: 29 August 2016
Catchwords: DEFENCE – application for leave to amend grounds of appeal – application for leave to adduce and rely on additional documentary evidence – whether s 23(1) of the Defence Force Discipline Appeals Act 1955 (Cth) confers incidental powers on the Tribunal to receive fresh or new evidence on appeal – whether s 23(2) of the Defence Force Discipline Appeals Act 1955 (Cth) constituted the Tribunal's exhaustive power to receive fresh or new evidence on appeal
Legislation: Courts-Martial Appeals Act 1955 (Cth), s 23 Criminal Appeal Act 1912 (NSW), s 12 Defence Force Discipline Appeals Act 1955 (Cth), ss 23(1), 23(1)(c), 23(2), 31, 31(1)(b), 31(1)(c), 33 Defence Force (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1982 (Cth)
Cases cited: Behan v Chief of Army [1991] ADFDAT 1 – cited Betts v The Queen (2016) 90 ALJR 758 – cited Cesan v Director of Public Prosecutions (Cth) (2007) 230 FLR 185 – cited Ferdinands v Chief of Army [2013] ADFDAT 2 – cited Green v Chief of Army [2011] ADFDAT 2 – cited Ratten v The Queen (1974) 131 CLR 510 – cited Thompson v Chief of Navy [2015] ADFDAT 1 – cited
Date of hearing: 29 July 2016
Category: Catchwords
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