Rosevear v Commissioner of Police [1990] AFPDT 5

Rosevear v Commissioner of Police [1990] AFPDT 5

Although the breaches of discipline were grave and the appellant was the leader and main aggressor, his previous satisfactory service, character references, and the disparity with the penalty imposed on another officer justify setting aside the penalty of dismissal and substituting a reduction in salary to the rate of a second year constable.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
18 December 1990
Procedural Posture
Disciplinary Appeal / Final Decision
Outcome
appeal allowed; penalty varied
Legal Topics
['police Discipline' 'penalty Determination' 'misconduct' 'appeal Against Dismissal']
['disciplinary Law' 'administrative Law'] ['police Discipline' 'penalty Determination' 'misconduct' 'appeal Against Dismissal']

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 1 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Procedural Posture

Disciplinary Appeal / Final Decision

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the penalty of dismissal imposed by the Commissioner of Police against Constable John Rosevear should be set aside and a lesser penalty substituted' 'Appropriate penalty for breaches of discipline by an Australian Federal Police officer']

Ratio Decidendi

Although the breaches of discipline were grave and the appellant was the leader and main aggressor, his previous satisfactory service, character references, and the disparity with the penalty imposed on another officer justify setting aside the penalty of dismissal and substituting a reduction in salary to the rate of a second year constable.

Court Disposition

appeal allowed; penalty varied

Orders

  • ['The penalty of dismissal imposed by the Commissioner is set aside.' 'Constable Rosevear is to suffer a reduction in annual rate of salary to the amount appropriate for a second year constable.' 'No order as to costs of this appeal.']