Li v Chief of Army

The case of *Li v Chief of Army* concerned an appeal to the High Court of Australia by Mr Li, who sought to challenge a decision of the Chief of Army regarding his discharge from the Australian Army. The dispute arose from the Chief of Army's decision to discharge Mr Li under section 110(1)(b) of the *Defence Act 1903* (Cth) on the grounds of his alleged failure to meet the general standard of a soldier. Mr Li contended that this decision was vitiated by a failure to afford him procedural fairness.

The central legal issue before the High Court was whether the Chief of Army, in making the decision to discharge Mr Li, was under a duty to afford him procedural fairness. This involved considering whether the decision was of a kind that attracted the requirements of procedural fairness, and if so, what those requirements entailed in the specific context of a military discharge. The court also had to determine whether any such duty had been breached.

In their joint judgment, Hayne and Crennan JJ held that the Chief of Army's decision to discharge Mr Li was not one that attracted the requirements of procedural fairness. Their Honours reasoned that the power to discharge a soldier under section 110(1)(b) of the *Defence Act* was an administrative power exercised in the context of the command and discipline of the armed forces. They distinguished this power from those that affect individual rights or interests in a manner that would ordinarily attract procedural fairness. The court found that the statutory scheme and the nature of the power were such that it was not impliedly required to afford procedural fairness, and therefore, no breach of such a duty could have occurred.