High Court of Australia
HIGH COURT OF AUSTRALIA
GORDON, STEWARD, GLEESON, JAGOT AND BEECH‑JONES JJ
KMD APPELLANT
AND
CEO (DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH NT) & ORS RESPONDENTS
KMD v CEO (Department of Health NT)
[2025] HCA 4
Date of Hearing: 11 February 2025
Date of Judgment: 27 February 2025
D2/2024
ORDER
1. Appeal allowed.
2. Set aside orders 1, 2 and 4 of the Court of Criminal Appeal of the Supreme Court of the Northern Territory made on 23 July 2024.
3. Remit the matter to the Court of Criminal Appeal of the Supreme Court of the Northern Territory for hearing by a bench differently constituted for reconsideration of the first respondent's supplementary notice of appeal dated 16 February 2024 filed in proceeding no CCA 6 of 2023 in accordance with these reasons.
4. Subject to any further order of the Court of Criminal Appeal of the Supreme Court of the Northern Territory, orders 1 and 3 of the Supreme Court of the Northern Territory made on 5 July 2023 be stayed until 14 days after the date of this order.
On appeal from the Supreme Court of the Northern Territory
Representation
KMD appeared in person
S J Free SC with L S Spargo-Peattie and M Thompson for the first respondent (instructed by Solicitor for the Northern Territory)
Submitting appearances for the second and third respondents
Notice: This copy of the Court's Reasons for Judgment is subject to formal revision prior to publication in the Commonwealth Law Reports.
CATCHWORDS
KMD v CEO (Department of Health NT)
Criminal law – Appeals – Mental impairment – Where appellant is liable to supervision under supervision order – Where court conducted periodic review of custodial supervision order and released appellant on non-custodial supervision order – Whether court's review of custodial supervision order miscarried by reason of appellant's refusal to cooperate with medical experts – Standard of review on appeal from finding that court not satisfied that safety of appellant and of public will be seriously at risk if appellant released on non-custodial supervision order – Whether Court of Criminal Appeal erred by confirming custodial supervision order without addressing requirements of Criminal Code Act 1983 (NT), Sch I, Pt IIA, Divs 5 and 7.
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