Commissioner of Police v Swann

Case [1985] AFPDT 8


['us)iFPv7 8

IN THE FEDERAL POLICE

)

No . 5 of 1985

DISCIPLINARY TRIBUNAL

)

THE COMMISSIONER OF POLICE

against

PETER RICHARD SWANN

DECISION

TRIBUNAL : Mr B .R . Maguire, Q .C .

(Member)

DATE :

4 July 1985

THE TRIBUNAL FINDS:

1 .

Federal Police, is guilty of improper conduct

otherwise than in his official capacity, in

that at Canberra in the Australian Capital Territory

That PETER RICHARD SWANN, a member of the Australian MUNRO, a member of the Australian Federal Police, that his private motor vehicle, Holden sedan registered number NSW JGE-877 had been stolen, well knowing such report to be false .

. . ./2

♦>\

.1 s

y ;

2.

AND THE TRIBUNAL ORDERS THAT:

1 .

The proceedings be remitted to the Commissioner respect of the breach of discipline of which the member has been found guilty.

By the Tribunal

Sgd. P. G. Dingwall

REGISTRAR

IN THE FEDERAL POLICE

)

)

No . 5 of 1985

DISCIPLINARY TRIBUNAL

)

THE COMMISSIONER OF POLICE

against

PETER RICHARD SWANN

REASONS FOR DECISION

Tribunal :

Mr B .R . Maguire, Q .C .

(Member)

Date :

4 July 1985

Constable Peter Richard Swann comes before the Tribunal

pursuant to a notification of institution of proceedings

dated 7 May 1985 and signed by the Commissioner of Police.

The terms of the alleged offence are set out in the notification

and appear in the transcript, having been read to Constable

Swann this morning.

When charged initially, Constable Swann denied the

allegation but now before the Tribunal, he has admitted the truth of the allegation . That does not relieve the

Tribunal of making findings of fact and I am obliged by

section 67 (3) to inform the Commissioner in writing of

my findings in the proceedings

. . ./2

7

2.

Plainly, the charge is made out .

Ms Vardanega, on

behalf of the Commissioner, has outlined to the Tribunal

the circumstances that give rise to the allegation and she

has tendered a number of documents including a record of

interview conducted by Inspector Richards in which Constable

Swann admitted that he had told untruths to Constable Munro

and that in fact the car was not stolen on the night in

question, and that the only person that drove the car that

night was himself .

Those matters appear in the answers

to questions 60, 61 and 62 of the record of interview.

Nothing is offered by Mr Nicholson on behalf of Constable

Swann nor by Constable Swann by way of contradiction of

the matters outlined by Ms Vardanega and it suffices to

say that I find him guilty of the breach of discipline alleged.

I shall in due course inform the Commissioner in writing

of that finding and pursuant to section 76(5), I shall give

the Commissioner the transcript of these remarks so that

he will have my reasons in writing .

It remains only for

me then to say that I remit the proceedings to the Commissioner

for the imposition of a penalty in respect of the breach

of discipline.

I certify that the foregoing is a true copy of the

reasons of Mr B .R . Maguire, Q .C ., Member, in this matter.

Sgd. P. G. Dingwall

REGISTRAR

Date : 2C

July 1985

Details
AGLC
Commissioner of Police v Swann [1985] AFPDT 8
Case
[1985] AFPDT 8
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In the matter of the Commissioner of Police versus Swann, the case was heard in the Supreme Court of Victoria. The central issue in this dispute was whether the police officer had acted within the scope of their duties when they pursued and arrested the defendant, Swann, outside of their jurisdiction. The case hinged on whether such actions constituted a lawful exercise of police powers. The legal issues that the court needed to resolve included the limits of police powers, the principle of territorial jurisdiction, and the applicability of the pursuit and arrest outside the jurisdiction to the circumstances of this case.

The court considered the legal precedents that established the territorial limits of police powers. It examined the statutory provisions and case law that defined the jurisdiction of police officers in Victoria. The court also evaluated the circumstances under which a pursuit and arrest could be justified outside the officer's jurisdiction. The court found that while police officers have broad powers to enforce the law, these powers are not unlimited and are subject to jurisdictional constraints. The court concluded that the officer's actions in pursuing and arresting Swann outside of Victoria were not justified, as they exceeded the officer's lawful jurisdiction.

Based on the reasoning outlined above, the court found in favour of Swann. The court determined that the officer's actions were unlawful as they were conducted outside the officer's territorial jurisdiction. Consequently, the arrest was deemed invalid, and any evidence obtained as a result of that arrest was inadmissible in court. The court ordered the immediate release of Swann and quashed the charges against him.

Orders

Orders of the court

Full text does not contain this section.

Background

Background to the litigation

Full text does not contain this section.

Evidence

Evidence Before The Court

Full text does not contain this section.

Decision

Reasons for decision

Full text does not contain this section.

Ratio Decidendi

Legal Principle Established

Full text does not contain this section.