Trusted by the judiciary, government lawyers, prosecutors, and many leading counsel. Click here to request a subscription.
Trusted by the judiciary, government lawyers, prosecutors, and many leading counsel.
Click here to request a subscription.
Trusted by the judiciary, government lawyers, prosecutors, and many leading counsel. Click here to request a subscription.
or click here to request site subscription to search and view all judgments |
Supreme Court allows appeal from High Court, and quashes decision to discharge member of defence forces.
Judicial review - discharge from defence forces - random drug testing - refusal by High Court (Hedigan J) to quash discharge - appeal - positive test for cannabis - defence that applicant had been in car when others smoked cannabis, but had not partaken himself - whether positive test could arise from passive smoking - injunctive relief granted - “Compulsory Random Drug Testing Administrative Instruction A7 Chapter 3” - par 304(a) - applicant denied opportunity to give evidence of his passive smoking - obligation under par 318 of regulations to consider defence - cut-off of 15ng/ml set to rule out effects of passive smoking - whether decision makers addressed right question - whether necessary to give applicant enough information to arm himself for the hearing of the disciplinary proceedings - constitutional right of access to the courts rendered "either pointless or so circumscribed as to be unacceptably ineffective" - lack of affidavit evidence from decision makers.
Note: This is intended to be a fair and accurate report of a decision made public by a court of law. Any errors should be notified to the editor and will be dealt with accordingly.
Trusted by the judiciary, government lawyers, prosecutors, and many leading counsel.
Click here to request a subscription.