R v Ng

[2006] QCA 218

Queensland Court of Appeal

Built by Barristers,
For Australian Law.

See how it works

Interrogate

Catchwords

1. Criminal Law
2. › Criminal Liability and Capacity
3. › Defence Matters
4. › Double Jeopardy
5. › Whether exclusion from school constituted 'punishment' under s 16 Criminal Code 1899 (Qld)
6. › Distinction between disciplinary action and punishment
7. › Criminal Code 1899 (Qld), s 16
1. Criminal Law
2. › Criminal Liability and Capacity
3. › Defence Matters
4. › Double Jeopardy
5. › Whether administrative disciplinary measures under regulatory statute constitute 'punishment'
6. › Education (General Provisions) Act 1989 (Qld), ss 33-36
7. › Criminal Code 1899 (Qld), s 16
1. Criminal Law
2. › Practice and Procedure
3. › Abuse of Process
4. › Stay of Proceedings
5. › Whether prosecution an abuse of process where school had proceeded administratively
6. › Whether improper motivation for prosecution
1. Criminal Law
2. › Practice and Procedure
3. › Indictment
4. › Multiple Charges
5. › Whether separate counts appropriate for acts separated in time during single episode
6. › Whether acts were separate and distinct in time or circumstance

Quick Take

Exclusion from school under the Education (General Provisions) Act 1989 (Qld) is not 'punishment' within s 16 of the Criminal Code 1899 (Qld), and does not preclude subsequent criminal prosecution for the same conduct. Whether action constitutes 'punishment' is determined by the nature and purposes of the legal regime, not the subjective perception of the affected person. Pennisi v Wyvill and O'Sullivan should not be followed insofar as it treated administrative disciplinary sanctions as 'punishment' under s 16.