The Queen v Rolfe

The High Court of Australia considered an appeal by the Crown against a decision of the Full Court of the Supreme Court of the Northern Territory. The case concerned a member of the Northern Territory Police Force, the respondent, who was charged with murder and alternative offences after allegedly fatally shooting a deceased person while deployed to make an arrest. The central dispute revolved around the interpretation of s 148B of the *Police Administration Act 1978* (NT), which provides immunity from civil and criminal liability for acts done in good faith in the exercise of a power or performance of a function under the Act.

The legal issues before the High Court included whether the term "function" as used in s 148B of the *Police Administration Act* encompassed the "core functions" of the Police Force as listed in s 5(2) of the same Act. Additionally, the Court considered whether the Full Court had erred in reformulating a question of law referred to it by the trial judge, and whether that reformulated question was hypothetical.

The High Court allowed the appeal, setting aside one of the orders of the Full Court. The Court restated the third question referred to the Full Court to clarify its scope. In answering the reformulated question, the High Court held that a "function" under s 148B of the *Police Administration Act* does not include the core functions listed in s 5(2). Instead, the Court determined that s 148B applies to the common law powers of police officers, as conferred by s 25 of the Act, and specific statutory powers such as the power of arrest under s 124 of the Act. The Court reasoned that the protection afforded by s 148B is limited to the exercise of powers and performance of functions that are themselves conferred or imposed by the Act or other laws, rather than the general objects or purposes of the Police Force outlined in s 5(2).