Federal Court of Australia
DEFENCE FORCE DISCIPLINE APPEAL TRIBUNAL
Douglas v Chief of Army [2017] ADFDAT 5 Appeal from: Defence Force Magistrate
File number: DFDAT 3 of 2016
Members: TRACEY (PRESIDENT), LOGAN (DEPUTY PRESIDENT) AND HILEY (MEMBER) JJ
Date of decision: 28 April 2017
Date of publication of reasons: 1 June 2017
Catchwords: DEFENCE – appeal from a decision of a Defence Force Magistrate – convictions for an act of indecency and for prejudicing the discipline of the Army – where the respondent conceded the convictions were unsafe – whether convictions ought to be quashed – whether a new trial ought to be ordered
Legislation: Defence Force Discipline Appeals Act 1955 (Cth) s 24 Defence Force Discipline Act 1982 (Cth) ss 60(1), 61(3) Crimes Act 1900 (ACT) s 60(1)
Cases cited: Gilham v The Queen (2012) 224 A Crim R 22; [2012] NSWCCA 131 Liberato v The Queen (1985) 159 CLR 507 M v The Queen (1994) 181 CLR 487 MFA v The Queen (2002) 213 CLR 606; [2002] HCA 53 R v Anderson (2001) 127 A Crim R 116 SKA v The Queen (2011) 243 CLR 400; [2011] HCA 13
Date of hearing: 28 April 2017
Place: Brisbane
Category: Catchwords
Number of paragraphs: 38
Counsel for the Appellant: D McLure SC and J Lawton
Solicitor for the Appellant: Gabbedy Milson Lee
Counsel for the Respondent: J Woodward and A Lye
Solicitor for the Respondent: Director of Military Prosecutions
ORDERS DFDAT 3 of 2016
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